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

some questions and answers - for INTRO to UNDERSTANDING WCAG 2.0 doc

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2005 00:23:37 -0600
To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <003b01c5ea76$485ef3b0$056fa8c0@NC6000BAK>
Here are some questions form one of the questionairs.

 

I am answering them on also logging them in GL so we can find them when we
are building the intro to the "guide Doc" (now the Understanding WCAG 2.0
doc) 

 

 

 

.what it means to be "known and documented"? 

 

GV: it means we know about it and have documented it here.

 

Does this mean that if a technology is mentioned below, only the mentioned
techniques are asserted to be sufficient?

 

GV:  No - other things may be sufficient as well.  these are things that are
documented here as things the WG feels are sufficient. 

 

 Can we explain about other techniques being possible, but needing a strong
argument? 

 

GV:  Yes - that will be in the intro section to the doc.    Not sure about
'stronger' part. 

 

If a technology isn't mentioned in this SC, but is mentioned in some other
SC, can we draw any conclusions about satisfying this SC using that
technology? 

 

GV:  don't know how.    Shouldn't be pro or con. 

 

Can we explain that no claim, positive or negative, is made about
technologies not listed below?

 

GV:  Yes.   

 


Gregg

------------------------

Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
Professor - Depts of Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 
< <http://trace.wisc.edu/> http://trace.wisc.edu/> FAX 608/262-8848  
For a list of our list discussions http://trace.wisc.edu/lists/

 <http://trace.wisc.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/>  

 

 
Received on Wednesday, 16 November 2005 06:23:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:40 GMT