- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2000 18:06:53 -0500 (EST)
- To: Jutta Treviranus <jutta.treviranus@utoronto.ca>
- cc: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-hwg@idyllmtn.com>, w3c-wai-au@w3.org
As a start I suggest using the list format of the checklist, and simply ading a line below each checkpoint to give the status of the tool with regard to that checkpoint. Phill suggested using the cheklist with HTML inputs containing comments, as well as having a couple for tester, date, tool tested... I think the idea is good. Charles McCN Charles McCN On Fri, 4 Feb 2000, Jutta Treviranus wrote: Kynn wrote: >Fred Barnett, a member of the HTML Writers Guild's governing board >who has experience using and reviewing authoring tools is interested >in writing a review of Allaire's Homesite product to evaluate how >it complies with ATAG. > >Would this be a useful project for him to undertake? Yes it would definitely be useful, there are quite a few tools to evaluate. To pull together the evaluations as one document we should probably agree on a common format. Perhaps we could offer a completed evaluation as a template to follow. Jutta -- Charles McCathieNevile mailto:charles@w3.org phone: +61 (0) 409 134 136 W3C Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/WAI 21 Mitchell Street, Footscray, VIC 3011, Australia
Received on Friday, 4 February 2000 18:07:00 UTC