- From: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
- Date: Wed, 31 Mar 1999 11:26:19 -0800
- To: "w3c-wai-au@w3.org" <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
I forget what I raised before. 2.3.5 needs wordsmithing - it's just too convoluted. 2.5.2 "removed" should not have a "d" on the end. 2.7.2 I may have mentioned this before: what is a "discussion of the help system"? 3.2.1 has already been noted as requiring grammatization. 3.4.2 perhaps: "Allow the author access to a text version of any site maps or other structural representations." It is very encouraging that *all* of the guidelines and checkpoints are at a level of abstraction that should account for the tools' use in any markup situation. The GLs are not specific to HTML or even to our current conception of what an "authoring tool" might be. I have no idea if as much can be said for the WCGLs but I hope they have taken into account that the Web of 2001 might be very different from that of 1999. As the "desktop" becomes more or less permanently connected to the internet we must be ever watchful that our objectives are kept in the minds of those who design all the "cool" stuff that seems to be coming right along any day now. -- Love. ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE http://dicomp.pair.com
Received on Wednesday, 31 March 1999 14:25:36 UTC