- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 04:15:35 -0400 (EDT)
- To: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
- cc: au <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
I have finally figured out what concerns me about this. Although in most
situations I would want a tool which did not annoy me, or require me to do
something, or prevent me from saving until I had satisfied a demand, I can
imagine circumstances where I would want a tool which did do all these things
(I have an alarm clock, for instance). Since annoying the user, or being
demanding, are not intrinsically barriers to the creation of accessible
content, however much they might be poor strategies for selling tools to
every person on the planet, and since in some cases they may actually be what
is required to remind/prompt/force the user to carry out a particular task, I
don't think we can write our requirements langusge like this.
I think that in general these things are desirable features of a product
which is pleasant to use, and it will not do us any harm to suggest that
tools be these things as a technique for naturally integratng tools. (It does
not, of itself, satisfy the requirement, and I hope it is not a thought that
has never occurred to developers before, but I don't see that as a reason not
to put it there, although by and large I would prefer some more concrete
suggeestions could be found in the techniques document *grin*.)
cheers
Charles McCN
On Sun, 22 Aug 1999, William Loughborough wrote:
>From the E & R document: "It is imperative that any tool have features
that assist in reminding, without nagging; in helping, without
demeaning; in suggesting, without demanding. We hope that the techniques
in this document, implemented in software programs, will gently guide
authors
along the path to more accessible documents." might fit in the AU
header?
--
Love.
ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE
http://dicomp.pair.com
Received on Wednesday, 25 August 1999 04:15:37 UTC