- From: Phill Jenkins <pjenkins@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 11:35:57 -0500
- To: w3c-wai-au@w3.org
I have a concern or question with the phrase "Where this is not reversible ". From the context, I'm not sure what "this" is referring to. If "this" is referring to fact that if the tool does maintain all the accessibility information but does not allow the process of conversion to be reversed, then it must *also* inform the author, then I do have a concern. Why do I have to inform the author if the information is maintained? If "this" is referring to *only* the fact that the conversion process is not reversible, independent of whether or not it maintains accessibility information, then I have a concern. I believe we should only minimally require the "reverse function" when the accessibility information is not maintained. Which I think is the desire of the working group. Proposed new wording: Minimum functionality: All accessibility information [content & logical structure] present in the initial document or fragment must be present in the transformed result. Where the accessibility information is not preserved and the process is not reversible, inform the author. Regards, Phill Jenkins, (512) 838-4517 IBM Research Division - Accessibility Center 11501 Burnet Rd, Austin TX 78758 http://www.ibm.com/able
Received on Monday, 9 July 2001 12:36:03 UTC