Re: Important: Issues relating to checkpoint 2.1 raised during 30 March teleconference.

At 11:08 AM 2000-04-05 -0400, Ian Jacobs wrote:
>"Gregory J. Rosmaita" wrote:
>> 
>> aloha, ian!
>> 
>> ian wrote:
>> 
>> quote
>> 3) Not all content that is human-viewable
>>      must be made available through the user interface.
>> unquote
>> 
>> doesn't the applicability clause satisfy this concern?  if you don't
>> support it, you don't have to make it available via the user interface, but
>> you do have to make all alternatives available through the user
interface...
>
>No, I don't think applicability covers this case. Suppose you
>recognize the "alt" attribute and it's text, which you can render.
>But you don't. I don't think that that's covered by the applicability
>clause.
>
>Nothing in UAAG 1.0 (right now) requires you to render "alt" text
>through
>the user interface. The fact that user agents do is a good thing. But
>for future languages, they might not.

That's the point.  It's not just a good thing.  It is required access.  And
the UAAG is the place to say it.

Appropriate exclusions are things like equivalents contained in sound files
where the browser has no sound output channel.  That is the only case that
is easy to rationalize as excluded.

Al

>
> - Ian
>
> 
>> that is lynx's path to conformance, is it not?
>> 
>> gregory
>> 
>> --------------------------------------------------------
>> He that lives on Hope, dies farting
>>       -- Benjamin Franklin, Poor Richard's Almanack, 1763
>> --------------------------------------------------------
>> Gregory J. Rosmaita <unagi69@concentric.net>
>>     WebMaster and Minister of Propaganda, VICUG NYC
>>          <http://www.hicom.net/~oedipus/vicug/index.html>
>> --------------------------------------------------------
>
>-- 
>Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
>Tel:                         +1 831 457-2842
>Cell:                        +1 917 450-8783
> 

Received on Wednesday, 5 April 2000 11:26:31 UTC