W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-au@w3.org > October to December 1999

Re: 3.2 relative priority vs P2

From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 1999 19:00:02 -0400 (EDT)
To: pjenkins@us.ibm.com
cc: w3c-wai-au@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.20.9910201854370.16157-100000@tux.w3.org>
Actually there are some structural features that are P3. I would prefer to
note the fact that in WCAG 1.0 structured features are P2 or P3 becuase

1) This is a reativ priority, and
2) Developers already need to understand relative priority - changing this
doesn't have any effect in the real world (although noting that there is no
P1 component does)

Charles McCN

On Wed, 20 Oct 1999 pjenkins@us.ibm.com wrote:

  
  
  In reviewing the priority of "3.2 Help the author create structured content and
  separate information from its presentation", I was cross referencing with the
  WCAG http://www.w3.org/TR/WAI-WEBCONTENT/#gl-structure-presentation and found
  all of them [3.1-3.7]  to be Priority 2, so... I propose we simply edit 3.2 to
  be [priority 2].
  
  I'm not lowering the priority, just simplifies the work for the developer in
  determining relative priority...
  
  Regards,
  Phill Jenkins,
  
  

--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, 20 October 1999 19:00:04 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:28:22 UTC