- From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1999 21:24:21 -0500
- To: w3c-wai-au@w3.org
- CC: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Hello, Per my action assigned 30 November at the ATAG teleconf, here is a definition of "applicability" that is short. It differs from the UAGL definition (as of the last call draft) in that it relies on common sense, not a series of specific cases of non-applicability. <DFN> Applicable checkpoint Some checkpoints may not apply to certain classes of authoring tools. Common sense dictates whether the requirements of a checkpoint exceed the scope of the tool's design. Checkpoints that require a tool to implement a functionality are applicable to the tool. However, some examples of where a checkpoint might not apply include: the authoring tool does not recognize or support a markup language or markup language feature, the authoring tool does not support a particular content type, and the authoring tool does not control the properties of an embedded object. </DFN> Note that this definition should also be accompanied by a change to the conformance statement that says that authoring tools only need to satisfy applicable checkpoints. - Ian P.S. I have cc'd the UAGL WG in case people in that WG find this definition more useful for UAGL as well. -- Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs Tel/Fax: +1 212 684-1814 Cell: +1 917 450-8783
Received on Tuesday, 30 November 1999 21:24:43 UTC