- From: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
- Date: Mon, 26 Apr 1999 09:35:46 -0700
- To: au <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
2.3.5 should be "an" object. 2.4.2 techniques include "...natural, intuitive fashion" which is a bit vague to us old people. In general the word "content" needs our attention, particularly since there is something called "Web Content Accessibility Guidelines" that makes the practice of "separating content from structure and format" a bit vague, even for young people. In one case "content" means *meaning* and in another it means meaning, structure, and format. This may seem pedantic but might be a central cause for misunderstanding, particularly since so many authors will feel that format and structure properly used provide meaning. It is well to speak of "non-semantic" format but that may actually be rare. Although braille pays homage to formatting, it's pretty rudimentary so we have to draw some lines indicating when it's appropriate/mandatory to describe the intent of certain formatting procedures. Sometimes it seems as if the uses made of styles need further explanation but I don't think there's any attribute mechanism to point out that drop caps are used structurally? 2.6 techniques mention setting warnings "quickly" and I would prefer "easily" since the speed isn't obviously important. -- Love. ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE http://dicomp.pair.com
Received on Monday, 26 April 1999 12:35:07 UTC