- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 14:29:45 -0400 (EDT)
- To: Jutta Treviranus <jutta.treviranus@utoronto.ca>
- cc: <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
Bit more background - there are perception problems with a number, in that if we say 1.1 then I don't think it conveys the fact that this is more or less our expected 2.0 draft, and if we say 1.9 then people will wonder what happened to 1.1 through 1.8. So the easiest thing is to have a name, hence "wombat" as a proposal. (Because animals are relatively uncontroversial). One of the reasons I would like people to scream now or hold their peace is that I want to publish this so you guys can look at it before the next meeting. cheers Charles McCN On Fri, 25 May 2001, Jutta Treviranus wrote: We are trying to find an appropriate name for our working draft revision of ATAG 1.0. Charles has suggested ATAG 1.9 as we are still referring to WCAG 1.0 until the draft WCAG 2.0 becomes more stable, but whatever we do will form the substantive basis of ATAG 2.0. Another alternative is ATAG 1.1 or simply an arbitrary name like "Wombat." What are people's thoughts? 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 Friday, 25 May 2001 14:31:48 UTC