- From: Gregory J. Rosmaita <unagi69@concentric.net>
- Date: Wed, 15 Dec 1999 12:02:58 -0500
- To: pjenkins@us.ibm.com
- Cc: Authoring Tools Guidelines List <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
aloha, phil!
why quote imply unquote that both the UI and the plumbing are included -- why
not explicitly state that both are _required_?
an implication doesn't conveys the same weight or authority that an explicit
statement carries...
if that is what is meant, why not simply state it?
gregory.
in response to a question by Charles McCN, Phil Jenkins wrote:
>CMN:
>>In other words, are you arguing that the ambiguity in the present wording
>is
>>going to be beneficial to developers who are thinking about how to
>implement?
>
>No, not at all. I want them to do both!
>
>Not all plumbing as a UI. And not all UI requires additional plumbing. So
>by "not limiting" the requirement to UI, or in other words, not inserting
>the phrase "user interface:, it implies both the UI and the plumbing are
>required.
>
>Regards,
>Phill Jenkins,
--------------------------------------------------------
He that lives on Hope, dies farting
-- Benjamin Franklin, Poor Richard's Almanack, 1763
--------------------------------------------------------
Gregory J. Rosmaita <unagi69@concentric.net>
WebMaster and Minister of Propaganda, VICUG NYC
<http://www.hicom.net/~oedipus/vicug/index.html>
--------------------------------------------------------
Received on Wednesday, 15 December 1999 11:55:24 UTC