W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2007

Re: Heads up: please review these documents by end of Wednesday

From: Loretta Guarino Reid <lorettaguarino@google.com>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 06:07:47 -0700
Message-ID: <824e742c0705160607p2df2b21v3f40ce310a74d457@mail.gmail.com>
To: "boland@nist.gov" <boland@nist.gov>
Cc: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Alternate version is defined in the glossary:

version that provides all of the same information and
functionality<http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/#functiondef> in
the same human language <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/#human-langdef> and
is as up to date as the non-conforming content


On 5/16/07, boland@nist.gov <boland@nist.gov> wrote:
>
> Do we want to (or should we) say anywhere that the alternate "version"
> should
> have the same functionality or purpose as the original "version" (re: use
> of
> the word "version")?  The reason I'm asking is that in some W3C Quality
> Assurance documents (for example, [1]) a "new version" means "a
> significant
> change or enhancement in functionality"?   Even though this reference is
> to
> a "new version of a specification", there may be some confusion with use
> of the
> word "version" in multiple contexts within W3C?
>
> Tim Boland NIST
>
> [1]: http://www.w3.org/QA/WG/qaframe-primer
>
> Quoting Loretta Guarino Reid <lorettaguarino@google.com>:
>
> > There are two documents that we would like the working group to review
> > before they are publicly released this week:
> >
> > 1) The discussion page for the alternate versions editorial note,
> available
> > at http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2007/05/alternate-versions.html
> > 2) A relatively long document that describes the changes that have been
> made
> > since the Last Call draft, and the rationale for those changes (as well
> as
> > for the ones we didn't make) We'll send the link to this document as
> soon as
> > it is ready.
> >
> > We'd like to ask you to look at these as soon as you can, so that you
> can
> > alert us if there are problems that need to be addressed. We would need
> > feedback no later than the end of the day tomorrow.
> >
> > The second document is a collection of information that is scattered
> among
> > the various responses, organized into a coherent stand-alone document.
> Since
> > the working group is getting its first look at this document so late, we
> can
> > delay publishing it for a few days, if need be.
> >
> > Gregg and Loretta
> >
>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 16 May 2007 13:08:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:50 GMT