Re: Subtext for 1.3

This makes sense, but I don't think that the final reference to guideline 4
is required - it should be implemented anyway...

So I would propose the following:

  Any decisions made for the author by the tool should optimize the
  accessibility of the content (as per WCAG 2.0). This applies to the
  choice of markup type, file type, and markup practices.

cheers

Charles

On Mon, 23 Apr 2001, Jutta Treviranus wrote:

  Regarding the subtext for 1.3. During our discussions last conference
  call, we  seemed to be  saying several things:

  1. When the tool automatically adds markup without the author
  choosing the type of markup or the actual markup, it should be
  accessible.
  2. When the tool automatically chooses the type of markup or file
  format it should choose the most  accessible markup type or format (a
  variant of 5.2).
  3. The tool must go with the author's choice if the author chooses a
  markup type that is not optimal for access.

  I propose the following draft subtext:

  Any decisions made for the author by the tool should optimize the
  accessibility of the content (as per WCAG 2.0). This applies to the
  choice of markup type, file type, and markup practices. If the author
  chooses a markup or file type that does not optimize accessibility,
  Guideline 4 should be implemented.

  jutta


-- 
Charles McCathieNevile    http://www.w3.org/People/Charles  phone: +61 409 134 136
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative     http://www.w3.org/WAI    fax: +1 617 258 5999
Location: 21 Mitchell street FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia
(or W3C INRIA, Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France)

Received on Monday, 23 April 2001 15:46:21 UTC