W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > April to June 2000

RE: IMPORTANT: Removing proposed checkpoint on synchronization

From: Jim Allan <allan_jm@tsb1.tsbvi.edu>
Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 11:57:48 -0500
To: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Message-id: <NBBBIBAJLBJPFGFFMBMEIEGNDPAA.allan_jm@tsb1.tsbvi.edu>
I agree, that we not have a checkpoint on synchronization. I see getting the
document out as a priority. Synchronization needs much more work to define
and illuminate situations/configurations for use/non-use.

Jim Allan, Statewide Technical Support Specialist
Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired
1100 W. 45th St., Austin, Texas 78756
voice 512.206.9315    fax: 512.206.9453  http://www.tsbvi.edu/
"Be BOLD and mighty forces will come to your aid." Basil King

-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-ua-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ua-request@w3.org]On
Behalf Of Jon Gunderson
Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2000 10:32 AM
To: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Subject: IMPORTANT: Removing proposed checkpoint on synchronization


Based on Ian's analysis [1] of the problems of including a synchronization
checkpoint I recommend that we reverse our decision to include a checkpoint
on synchronization.  I base this on the following reasons:

1. The group has identified a couple situations where synchronization is
useful, but there are other situations where a user may not want
synchronization of views or synchronized views may impede
accessibility.  This requirement therefore needs to be further developed to
determine when synchronization is or is not appropriate.  My feeling is
that these would be in situations covered by current checkpoints (i.e.
outline views, source views...)

2. This is a new requirement and it may trigger the document to return to a
previous stage in the process, delaying publication as a recommendation and
taking time from resolving other issues.

3. We have and can include in additional techniques for the situations the
group has identified where synchronized views make sense.  The techniques
will encourage developers to use synchronization in satisfying the
associated checkpoints.  Therefore we are not abandoning the need for
synchronization of some views, but making them part of satisfying other
checkpoints.

Please respond to this e-mail either in favor or in opposition to this
resolution.  If there is opposition to the proposal I will include this
issue in the next available telecon.  No response to this issue will result
in my assuming that you support the proposal.  But I would rather have
members explicitly state their support or opposition to this proposal to
the list.

Thanks,
Jon


[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2000AprJun/0300.html
Jon Gunderson, Ph.D., ATP
Coordinator of Assistive Communication and Information Technology
Chair, W3C WAI User Agent Working Group
Division of Rehabilitation - Education Services
College of Applied Life Studies
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
WWW: http://www.w3.org/wai/ua
Received on Wednesday, 10 May 2000 12:58:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 06:50:03 GMT