W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > October to December 2010

Re: Approving the Editors' Draft for publishing [was]Re: Meeting: User Agent Teleconference for 18 November 2010

From: Jeanne Spellman <jeanne@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 08:47:22 -0500
Message-ID: <4CF5006A.2030706@w3.org>
To: Greg Lowney <gcl-0039@access-research.org>
CC: Markku Hakkinen <mhakkinen@acm.org>, Jan Richards <jrichards@ocad.ca>, UAWG <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
I also agreed that the summary is a different animal than the rationale. 
  Perhaps the summary belongs only in the Implementation document, since 
that is our non-normative explanatory document.

Please note that I did add the sentence Greg suggested from ATAG stating 
that the success criteria and notes were normative, so that the 
summaries would not be considered normative.

On 11/29/2010 8:08 PM, Greg Lowney wrote:
> Regarding the Summaries paragraphs...
> Jan and Mark, the Rationale paragraphs that ATAG2 uses for guidelines
> seem equivalent to the Intent paragraphs that UAAG2's Implementing
> document uses for success criteria; are you suggesting something like
> the latter should be copied into our main document?
> Both the Rationale and Intent paragraphs seem very different from the
> Summary paragraphs, whose goal is not to explain why a /guideline/ was
> included, but rather to provide a concise, non-technical description of
> its /success criteria/ and how they fit together. The original
> introduction is at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ua/2010OctDec/0007.html.
Received on Tuesday, 30 November 2010 13:47:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:49:39 UTC