On 10 Aug 2009, at 14:52, Chris Reeve wrote: > Some destination sites do not have the associated pdf icon. The only > have a link to their PDF. Their site which links to the PDF does > comply with 2.4.4. About an hour ago, I mentioned I was advised by a > previous Working Group to the html/text version. Another Working > Group suggested to link directly to the PDF. > > One member of the Working Group said it depends on the fact if the > individual who is disabled is at an disadvantage rather than someone > who is not. The interpertation from the Working Group was if the > visitor who was not disabled read the same context as inteded, than > an individual with a disability will not be at a disadvantage. Unless you've been in communication with the working group as well (and I don't think you have, since I think I recognize all the comments you paraphrase above from earlier in this and related thread) — the comments you have received have been from Interest Group members (who may also be Working Group members, but I don't believe they were speaking as such). They are giving you an informed opinion, not a working group ruling. -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.ukReceived on Monday, 10 August 2009 14:23:40 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 18:14:49 GMT