- From: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
- Date: Tue, 11 May 1999 15:45:43 -0700
- To: au <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
CMcCN:: "I can think of 2 new ways of dividing the document up in the last 10 minutes." WL: The absolute maximum number of "Sections" into which me may divide the currently agreed-upon guidelines is 10. The absolute minimum number of "Sections" is 1. On our plate right now is the decision of whether to use 1 or 2. Any argument used for 2 is likely valid for 3 - 10. The concept of division is anathema to the overall idea of inclusion because the basis for the choice of 2 is essentially that there is "obviously" a difference between the interface to the tool and the output of the tool. From the point of view of Web Access this is not "obvious" whether "the folks who write my help text are completely separate from the folks who design the UI for accessing help" in Bruce's context or whether "the folks who create the Web are the same as the folks who 'use' the Web" in my context. I daresay that within any hierarchical tool design factory there are divisions of labor along various lines that have historical and practical bases but that shouldn't alter the notion that "we're all in this together" and if we separate, or divide on the basis of author/user we err on the side of exclusion. I am not yet swayed from the notion of oneness in our guideline set. See ya Friday/Saturday/Sunday. -- Love. ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE http://dicomp.pair.com
Received on Tuesday, 11 May 1999 18:45:08 UTC