- From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 11 Aug 1999 11:10:57 -0400
- To: "Gregory J. Rosmaita" <unagi69@concentric.net>
- Cc: User Agent Guidelines Emailing List <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
"Gregory J. Rosmaita" wrote: > > aloha, ian! > > i cast an unequivocal vote of support for your proposal... it would be of > utmost utility for anyone using assistive technology -- not only speech-output, > but refreshable braille and screen magnification as well... > > one question (with appologies to thatch) -- since the ian's proposed checkpoint > is flagged "for assistive technologies" would hybrids such as HPR be covered by > this checkpoint? It is merely a question of conformance. Any piece of software may claim conformance as an assisitive technology, which means that it satisfies a subset of the checkpoints. If HPR wishes to claim that type of conformance, it must satisfy that checkpoint. The question remains: are the two categories useful and will it make sense for software we are familiar with to conform to one category or the other? This issue is on the agenda of today's teleconference.... [1] - Ian [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/1999JulSep/0096.html -- Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs Tel/Fax: +1 212 684-1814
Received on Wednesday, 11 August 1999 11:11:02 UTC