W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > October to December 1998

Re: Rating UA guidelines

From: Paul Adelson <paul.adelson@citicorp.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 14:51:09 -0500
Message-Id: <199810131951.PAA21987@egate2.citicorp.com>
To: Jon Gunderson <jongund@staff.uiuc.edu>
Cc: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
1) I agree that the guidelines should specify 'what needs to be possible' and
not the technical specifics of 'how to do it', so that the guidelines support
rather than impede advancements. Remember: Older, highly specific
specifications for wheelchairs stymied introduction of wheelchairs that are
lighter, more practical, easier to use and more fun to be in.

2) Re: "I think we should listen to our developer representatives in the group
on what helps them the most".
Yes -- As long as we keep in mind that user advocacy, not developer advocacy,
is our primary task. After all, what helps developers most is guidelines that
match what they are already working on -- which may or may not be what's best
for end users.

Jon Gunderson wrote:

> I understand your concerns about big verses small developers and 3rd party
> assitive technology.  But there are a number of reasons I think we should
> only specify what we feel are important for the user interface and not try
> to dictate what technology should have what feature.
> 1. Knowledge: The group as a whole doesn't have enough knowledge about the
> current and emerging technologies and the internal dynamics of companies to
> know if any technology specific recommendations make sense to implement a
> guideline.  The more we can give specific design goals and the less on how
> a company should do it I think the more cooperation we will have with
> industry as a whole.
> 2. Time: I want the group to focus on design goals of what people need, and
> not get into potentially long debates about whether it is a browser
> function or an assitive technology function.   If we have good goals and
> solid techniques for implementation developers will probably accept them.
> We need to finish this draft of the guidelines and get to propsed
> recommendation so that developers can start to use them.  So the more we
> try to micromanage the implementation of the guidelines the more time it
> will take to get a proposed recommendation prepared, and probably the more
> diffciult it will be to get W3C approval, since member companies will want
> to verify that our micro managed implementation specifications are
> technically valid and acheivable.  I think we should listen to our
> developer representatives in the group on what helps them the most
> (developers, please chime in here to give your opinion)
> I am open to discussion these issues, and would be interested in how people
> in the group feel about these statements (good, bad, what ever).
> Jon
> Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP
> Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology
> Division of Rehabilitation - Education Services
> University of Illinois at Urbana/Champaign
> 1207 S. Oak Street
> Champaign, IL 61820
> Voice: 217-244-5870
> Fax: 217-333-0248
> E-mail: jongund@uiuc.edu
> WWW:    http://www.staff.uiuc.edu/~jongund
>         http://www.als.uiuc.edu/InfoTechAccess

  -- Paul Adelson
* The views expressed are those of the
* author and do not necessarily reflect the
* position of Citibank or Citigroup.
Received on Tuesday, 13 October 1998 15:51:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:49:21 UTC