Re: 6.4 and accessibility

I will get this done.....  Would you be able to give me an action on this?

Mary Ellen Zurko wrote:
> For the non visual rephrasing, nobody seems to mind. Thomas and Anil, can 
> you make it so? 
> 
> And nobody can explain the header recommendations? So should we remove 
> them? 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From:
> Mary Ellen Zurko/Westford/IBM
> To:
> public-wsc-wg@w3.org
> Date:
> 03/28/2008 05:34 PM
> Subject:
> 6.4 and accessibility
> 
> 
> It seems possible to rephrase this part of 6.4.4 to not be just visual:
> 
> "For visual user agents, these interactions MUST be presented in a way 
> that makes it impossible for the user to view or interact with the 
> destination web site that caused the danger situation to occur."
> 
> could instead be:
> These interactions MUST be presented in a way that makes it impossible for 
> the user go to or interact with the destination web site that caused the 
> danger situation to occur.
> 
> For the header recommendations, I could use a bit more context (I'm only 
> about two pages into Serge et al's paper; I'm hoping to finish it on the 
> trip out to the RSA conference): 
> 
> "For user agents with a visual user interface, headings of these warnings 
> MUST include words meaning "caution" or "warning". The headings of these 
> warnings MUST be the locus of attention."
> 
> Why the headings? Is it _just_ about locus of attention? Are there other 
> things about the headings that make them special?

Received on Thursday, 24 April 2008 21:22:17 UTC