- From: <Bruce_Roberts/CAM/Lotus@lotus.com>
- Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 16:00:46 -0400
- To: w3c-wai-au@w3.org
I agree with Charles that my re-wording is not needed as a checkpoint. I'd rather see it in the techniques for 2.1.1. -- Bruce Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>@w3.org on 05/25/99 02:25:13 PM Sent by: w3c-wai-au-request@w3.org To: WAI AU Guidelines <w3c-wai-au@w3.org> cc: Subject: 2.1.4 - identifying by text equivalent Bruce Roberts proposed a wording change some time ago which nicely captured the meaning of the checkpoint: allow the author to identify all document elements that are editable or that wil affect the output. I think the checkpoint is not necessary, but if we want it we should adopt Bruce's wording... charles --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 Tuesday, 25 May 1999 15:54:10 UTC