- From: Carlos Iglesias <carlos.iglesias@fundacionctic.org>
- Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 12:29:46 +0200
- To: <shadi@w3.org>, <public-wai-ert@w3.org>
Hi Shadi, see below. > -----Mensaje original----- > De: public-wai-ert-request@w3.org > [mailto:public-wai-ert-request@w3.org] En nombre de Shadi Abou-Zahra > Enviado el: lunes, 04 de abril de 2005 18:53 > Para: public-wai-ert@w3.org > Asunto: Re: ERT Action Item: Use Case Scenarios for EARL > > > Hi Carlos, > > > A - Just a claim that says "This page is accesible for people with > > cognitive disabilities". > > > > B - Detailed info about the WCAG checkpoints the page conforms. > > > > IMO the answer is A. Do you think that most of the people with > > disabilities know the WCAG? > > What about if browsers would support the user preferences > such as "do not display pages with flickering content" or > "use high contrast style sheets for pages with low color contrast"? > > That means that the EARL reports and WCAG checkpoints (or > even tests) are not directly visible to the end-users. Wendy > made the analogy to RSS which is a transparent, > machine-readable technology. Perfect. That was what I mean, wathever you use it should be completely transparent to the end-users. Regards, CI.
Received on Tuesday, 5 April 2005 10:30:27 UTC