- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 15:16:31 -0500 (EST)
- To: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- cc: WAI AU Guidelines <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
I agree that we should be separating the documents, but I think we want to have fairly stropng cross-linking between a given checkpouint and techniques to satisfy it. Charles On Sat, 27 Feb 1999, Ian Jacobs wrote: Charles McCathieNevile wrote: > > I think we need to think about whether Techniques are applied to > checkpoints, guidelines, or both. My proposal is that we categorise > techniques by checkpoint normally, although I don't think we should > preclude the possibility that there are techniques which apply to a whole > guideline. I think the techniques should be separated from the checkpoints and guidelines, preferably in another document, but at least after the checkpoints and guidelines. Too much detail inline will distract readers from the flow of more abstract discussions. One reasons to create a second document is to save download and printing times. The Web Content Guidelines alone are about 20 pages. The Techniques document is almost 50. If you want a reader to digest the ideas, the Guidelines document should be kept as short as possible. - Ian -- Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org) Tel/Fax: (212) 684-1814 http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs --Charles McCathieNevile mailto:charles@w3.org phone: +1 617 258 0992 http://purl.oclc.org/net/charles W3C Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/WAI MIT/LCS - 545 Technology sq., Cambridge MA, 02139, USA
Received on Saturday, 27 February 1999 15:16:38 UTC