W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 1999

Re: Dumb Question about Recent Email

From: Bruce Bailey <bbailey@clark.net>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 14:44:16 -0400
Message-Id: <199906111847.OAA00803@smtp-gw2.vma.verio.net>
To: "jonathan chetwynd" <jay@peepo.com>
Cc: "WAI IG" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
> This slightly misses the point that the thing to be proven was generally
> proposed before being proved.
> Usually by drawing a figure in the sand, if you follow Blake.

I would argue that the obligation to provide a "proof by example" is more a
burden for you than anyone else on the WAI!  Your SignBrowser site
(http://www.peepo.com/) just doesn't do it for me.
 
> That is, no-one would browse the web if they had to understand the syntax
> first.(HTML, Java, script, +, +, +)

Ahh, but many here would argue that one should NOT be AUTHORING without at
least understanding HTML!  One does not need to know how to be a mechanic
before one learns to drive.  We do, however, have certain expectations for
those that would build roads...

> Meaning:
> Could W3C make an effort to demonstrate their accessibility, as well as
> talk and write about it. Hence Marshall McLuhan.

The WAI material conforms with the "Triple-A" level of the WCAG.
The W3C material parses through the W3C validator.

> This was intended to refer to Learning Difficulties as well as other
> minorities.

If you think the WCAG can be better written to address LD, you are free to
contribute to them (as you have in the past).  If you are not satisfied
with the results, post proposed revised guideline someplace convenient to
you, and then create and/or reference sites that you find satisfactory.
Received on Friday, 11 June 1999 14:47:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:13:44 GMT