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

Re: priority wording

From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1998 19:58:54 -0500
Message-ID: <3673114E.427E9BC8@w3.org>
To: Bryan Campbell <bryany@pathcom.com>
CC: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Hi Bryan,

1) The word "person" is not specific enough for our needs. We need
  to distinguish users from authors from developers from readers from
  In the introduction, our wording can be humanized, but when we must
  be clear about the class of people in question, I prefer to stick with

2) The word "must" is standard in W3C specifications. We use
   use the term in accordance with RFC 2119 (which defines
   for MUST, SHOULD, and MAY as used in like contexts). While
   less provocative language may feel better, I would prefer
   to use the standard language where possible.

As the document stabilizes, we (the editors) will have more
opportunities to massage the language of the document so that
it is both readable and a rigorous document. We will keep the
spirit of your comments in mind when we work on the introductory
and explanatory material.

Please keep the comments coming!

 - Ian

Bryan Campbell wrote:

> I've been looking for general support for Accessibility & there's more
> excuses than I expected: See (& note GDrake's not my problem attitude)
> http://browserwatch.internet.com/cgi-bin/Ultimate.cgi?action=threadlist&foru
> m=BrowserWatch+Chat&number=1&topic=000310-000000-120798-000011.msg&DaysPrune=80
> Which brings me to the wording of the Priorities it will likely all sound
> better by letting developers know they're ensuring all people can use the
> Web while not decreasing the Priorities' value to consumers. I didn't use
> the term user as I detest it, frankly I connect it to drug u... or a herd of
> mindless sheep. People buy software (whether or not it relates to
> Accessibility) so I like to subtlety remind software writers of that by not
> referring to faceless users. In the Guildlines' Introduction & Priorities
> talking about people will personalize this effort. Next is a reworded
> Priority 1 to illustrate the concept to garner Group reaction. (The rest
> will take a little time as my typing somewhat resembles the challenge of
> 'Assembling The International Space Station' in a space suit
> http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap981210.html )
> "Only use of this <b>essential technique</b> by user agents as a native
> feature or through compatibility with assistive technology <b>ensures that
> people</b> with certain disabilities will be able to access all information.
> This technique is a necessity for some individuals to be able to use the Web."
> The word 'must' is removed as people tend to bristle at being told what to
> do. 2 phrases, essential technique & ensures that people, are in bold face
> to emphasize importance & accomplishment. Also gone is the word 'impossible'
> since it doesn't relate to the Web's nature!
> Regards,
> Bryan
> -> "I don't need to stand to talk, to advise, & to generally make a pain in
> the ass out of myself." Dr. Stephen Franklin, "Babylon 5": 'Shadow Dancing'

Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org) 
Tel/Fax: (212) 684-1814 
Received on Sunday, 13 December 1998 13:10:09 UTC

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