W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > January to March 2003

Re: Automated Accessibility Options

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@sidar.org>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2003 00:17:03 +1100
Cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
To: "Jim Ley" <jim@jibbering.com>
Message-Id: <78B1C1A8-27C2-11D7-A9E3-000A95678F24@sidar.org>


On Wednesday, Jan 15, 2003, at 00:04 Australia/Melbourne, Jim Ley wrote:

> "Charles McCathieNevile" <charles@sidar.org> wrote in message
> news:7722DD7F-2736-11D7-B233-000A95678F24@sidar.org...
>> On Monday, Jan 13, 2003, at 21:44 Australia/Melbourne, Jim Ley wrote:
>>> CC/PP is massively
>>> over-engineered for the above, doesn't work simply with web caches
>>> (unlike
>>> Nick's x-accessibility header)
>>
>> Why doesn't CC/PP work readily with caches?
>
> The problem I was forseeing is that the CC/PP RDF would be pretty much
> individual, so that when you made a request, you'd include a link to 
> your
> own CC/PP RDF file, so that each request would contain different and 
> person
> specific RDF.  Therefore proxy caches would see every request as 
> different
> even with appropriate vary headers.   However I may be wrong in 
> thinking
> that self authorship is likely, perhaps people would just point at one 
> of a
> few CC/PP docs, so the requests would be very similar - If that was the
> case, CC/PP seems rather pointless.

I think the need for authoring mechanisms that are usable by 
individuals points towards re-using common features - work being done 
by people like the Open University on Learner Profiles suggests that 
most of the profile is pieces selected from a "palette" of choices, 
where the "palette" is widely understood and used.

> "At the least, 1.1 proxy servers should pass requests that include 
> CC/PPs on
> to servers in the hope that the servers will understand the requests"
>> From http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-CCPP/  is hardly a ringing endorsement 
>> of
> CC/PP and proxy caches, and actually seems to say, we're only hopeful 
> they
> work!  Quite apart from HTTP 1.0 proxies (which I'm sure exist still) 
> where
> it says " HTTP 1.0 servers and proxies may not be able to handle 
> CC/PPs. "
>
> In principle there's nothing in CC/PP that prevents caches from 
> working,
> simply that the proxies haven't implemented anything appropriate.

Ah. I am perfectly willing to believe that is the current state of 
affairs. Which is why I was suggesting it would be valuable for Nick to 
show how it should and can be done...

cheers

Chaals

--
Charles McCathieNevile           charles@sidar.org
Fundación SIDAR                       http://www.sidar.org
Received on Tuesday, 14 January 2003 08:17:35 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:08 GMT