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

RE: clean AND CORRECTED guideline1.1_proposal.html

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2005 13:55:36 -0600
To: "'Andrew Kirkpatrick'" <akirkpatrick@macromedia.com>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <013f01c5f6b1$332871a0$8c17a8c0@NC6000BAK>
Can you suggest one? 



 -- ------------------------------ 
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 




From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of Andrew Kirkpatrick
Sent: Thursday, December 01, 2005 7:39 AM
To: Gregg Vanderheiden; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: RE: clean AND CORRECTED guideline1.1_proposal.html

It seems that the issue is in how 'video' is defined.  I'd like to say that
video includes animated content, not just recorded real images.  Can a
definition for video be added?




Can you suggest wording to include in success criterion or in HOW TO MEET?




How is 'video' defined? Is a long animation 'video'?  (e.g.
http://site.aol.com/accessibility/press/sample.html).  In terms of what
users need, there is no difference between this and a recorded movie of
actual events, but there is a little ambiguity.

Received on Thursday, 1 December 2005 19:56:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:57 UTC