- From: Charles Oppermann <chuckop@MICROSOFT.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Mar 1999 11:54:52 -0800
- To: WAI AU Guidelines <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
<< It is my feeling that the time has come for the group to pay more attention than it has done in the last ten weeks to the second of its stated obligations. >> So you feel that the last 10 weeks have produced a stable section 2 and now it's time to work on section 3? If so, I couldn't disagree more. Section 2 is by no means complete, stable or even useful yet. All the big issues of generated content have not been discussed in depth, for example: Prompting for ALT text Requiring <label> ALT vs. TITLE on <AREA> Use of style sheets NOFRAMES and NOSCRIPT Sure, there are checkpoints pre-written and in the document, but are they being reviewed, discussed and prioritized? No, we're spending all our time on UI issues. Once again, the big picture is being missed in favor of the 5% case. This is not to say that the accessibility of the UI isn't important - it is - it's just that the generated content is MORE important. Let's get that sorted out first. I'm beginning to feel that there is a huge gap between what I'm expecting from this WG and what is being produced. It appears that Charles feels that the major issues are resolve and now it's time to deal with some of the more minor issues. It's my perception that the major issues are in no way resolved. Charles Oppermann Program Manager, Microsoft Accessibility and Disabilities Group http://www.microsoft.com/enable/ -----Original Message----- From: Charles McCathieNevile [mailto:charles@w3.org] Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 1999 11:13 AM To: WAI AU Guidelines Subject: Tabling section 3 I am strongly against the group adopting this as a firm principle, despite the fact that it describes what has been done in the last 10 weeks. I think that there are relationships between elements of section 3 and section 2 which mean we can better refine each section in the context of the other. I do not feel that we should split the work of the group into producing two separate documents, unless we are planning to produce a complete set of guidelines for section 3, rather than refer in many cases to other documents. The group has not considered that as a sensible policy, I think quite rightly. It is my feeling that the time has come for the group to pay more attention than it has done in the last ten weeks to the second of its stated obligations. Thoughts everyone...? Charles McCN I propose that the working group completely table section 3 until section 2 is completed. Let's solve the problems for the 95% case and then deal with the problems in the 5% case. Charles Oppermann Program Manager, Microsoft Accessibility and Disabilities Group http://www.microsoft.com/enable/ --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 Wednesday, 10 March 1999 14:55:04 UTC