- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 12:16:43 -0400 (EDT)
- To: "Gregory J. Rosmaita" <unagi69@concentric.net>
- cc: Authoring Tools Guidelines List <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
Might as well record some other comments... I am planning to remove the Amaya samples and put the notes into the evaluation document, unless people would like to have some references to real-world implementations in the techniques (and actually say so...). More templates would be good. I will try to revive my gallery template (designed for a database-backed application) Under 2.1 I think it is worth listing specs we have and speccs in development, as well as a pointer to the TR page where the latest information exists. I am not sure if the list is too big or not though. The WCAG references for 3.1, 3.2, could use some filling out. Checkpoints 1.4 and 3.4 could use some filling out and references to ER and other review work. Charles On Thu, 21 Sep 2000, Charles McCathieNevile wrote: Sorry dude, yeah, I will take that up with Ian again. I don't know how he does it for the WCAG stuff, but what is done for ATAG is a lynx dump (much less than ideal ;-). Yes, the plain text and other versions do get second class treatment, but this is a reasonable thing to get right. Charles -- Charles McCathieNevile mailto:charles@w3.org phone: +61 (0) 409 134 136 W3C Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/WAI Location: I-cubed, 110 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053, Australia September - November 2000: W3C INRIA, 2004 Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
Received on Thursday, 21 September 2000 12:16:45 UTC