Re: Techniques for 3.1 (get alternative content)

Hi all,

Looking at the voluminous postings for Checkpoints 1.3, 3.1 and 3.2, I
can't help but think there must be a better way.  After all, the
techniques we are using as a basis ALREADY appear in the WCAG techniques
note!

Perhaps the answer is that the techniques for ATAG should not focus so
much on how to meet the WCAG guidelines (they have techniques for that
already).  Instead our techniques should focus on ways that tools can
meet the ATAG guidelines most effectively.  This would include pointing
out how multiple ATAG guidelines can be met simultaneously, to what
extent certain types of things can be automated, suggestions on what to
tell authors so that they write quality descriptions, etc.

Of course, we can still narrow down the applicable WCAG checkpoints and
techniques (ex. the priority of ATAG Checkpoint 3.1 is relative but it
only applies only WCAG Guideline 1).

What do other people think?

Cheers,
Jan

-- 
Jan Richards
jan.richards@utoronto.ca
Access Software Designer
Adaptive Technology Resource Centre
University of Toronto
(416) 946-7060

Received on Monday, 21 February 2000 14:55:31 UTC