W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > July to September 2002

Re: compatibility

From: David Poehlman <poehlman1@comcast.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2002 20:01:19 -0400
To: Robert Neff <robert.neff@uaccessit.com>, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Message-id: <009001c22c5b$e9fd68a0$19e03244@DAVIDPOEHLMAN>

Actually, a matrix would be good but the one I'd like to see is one that
provides the best practices for the broadest impact possible on
accessibility.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Neff" <robert.neff@uaccessit.com>
To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Sent: Monday, July 15, 2002 1:50 PM
Subject: RE: compatibility



I am referencing Greg's remarks.

A negative connotation could be inferred by this. Yet we see this
already but in another form and that is "works best with this browser
and version" and I will not state the web sites and browsers.

I would like to see a compliance matrix that would be a reference tool
developers, managers and professionals could refer.  I would not be
opposed to putting an accessibility statement that states "we have
designed our site to meet the W3C and 508 requirements, however, here is
how your web browser or assistive device interprets the guidelines."
Maybe interpret is a misleading word, however, maybe there is a more
appropriate word, but I think the point is made.

This is where we would need a matrix for everyone to view AND THIS WOULD
BE A GRASS ROOTS EFFORT THAT WOULD HIGHLIGHT THE ISSUES AND MAYBE SOME
COMPANIES WOULD TAKE THIS SERIOUSLY.

Does the page authoring tools group have anything like this?

Robert Neff
robert.neff@uaccessit.com
214.213.1979
Received on Monday, 15 July 2002 20:02:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:05 GMT