W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > July to September 2005

Re: Words in place of optional

From: Maurizio Boscarol <maurizio@usabile.it>
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 17:40:58 +0200
Message-ID: <42E7AB0A.2080300@usabile.it>
To: lisa@ubaccess.com
CC: wai-gl <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>

Lisa Seeman wrote:

>
> I am a bit concerned with using the word optional for techniques that 
> do not map to  success criteria.
>
> Some techniques are less important and hence can be marked as 
> optional. However a lot of important techniques for the accessibility 
> of the content do not map to success criteria  because they are hard 
> to test etc...
>
> I think labeling them optional makes important techniques sound 
> unimportant . I would prefer a term such as preferred , encouraged or 
> advanced techniques.
>

I agree with this distiction between optional (really less important) 
and preferred or advanced. It's important to point out that a 
not-automatically testable techniques is not automatically optional...

M-
Received on Wednesday, 27 July 2005 15:31:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:39 GMT