W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > October to December 2012

Re: is javascript considered good wacg 2.0 practice?

From: David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 00:14:17 +0000
Message-ID: <50CFB559.7090904@david-woolley.me.uk>
To: 'W3C WAI ig' <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Emmanuelle Gutiérrez y Restrepo wrote:

> Accessibility: "extent to which products, systems, services, environments
> and facilities can be used by people from populations with the widest range
> of user needs for the widest range of goals in the widest range of contexts
> of use" (Resolution agreed in the Warsaw meeting of ISO/IEC SC35 WG6 -
> August - 2011).

That's quite a broad definition.  It in no way restricts itself to 
people with physical disabilities (or even physical or mental ones).  It 
is very much broader than the current WCAG terms of reference.

David Woolley
Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may want.
RFC1855 says there should be an address here, but, in a world of spam,
that is no longer good advice, as archive address hiding may not work.
Received on Tuesday, 18 December 2012 00:14:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:47 UTC