- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 10 May 1999 16:57:02 -0400 (EDT)
- To: Jutta Treviranus <jutta.treviranus@utoronto.ca>
- cc: love26@gorge.net, au <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
I do not feel that will solve the problem. I do think it would be a step in the right direction. Charles On Sun, 9 May 1999, Jutta Treviranus wrote: I have no objection to a single guidelines section with an A and B subsection. Jutta At 6:58 AM -0700 5/10/99, William Loughborough wrote: >JT:: "...both guideline 2 and 3 are ultimately for everyone." > >WL: See how easy it is? You've just merged *Sections* 2 & 3 by making >them *guidelines* <g>. The contents of Sections 2 & 3 are *just* >guidelines and the differentiation along lines of whether they refer to >the interface or the output are entirely specious. Because we arrived at >the notion of separating them into "sections" on a particular basis >doesn't mean that such a division has any useful purpose - and many of >us feel that it is just a (very subtle?) form of ghettoization. I still >vote for merger. >-- >Love. > ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE >http://dicomp.pair.com --Charles McCathieNevile mailto:charles@w3.org phone: +1 617 258 0992 http://www.w3.org/People/Charles W3C Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/WAI MIT/LCS - 545 Technology sq., Cambridge MA, 02139, USA
Received on Monday, 10 May 1999 16:57:13 UTC