RE: Checkpoints for Guideline 3 from Heather Swayne on 2001-07-16 (w3c-wai-au@w3.org from July to September 2001)

From: Heather Swayne <hswayne@microsoft.com>
Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2001 18:24:48 -0700
To: "Charles McCathieNevile" <charles@w3.org>, "Jan Richards" <jan.richards@utoronto.ca>
Cc: <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
Message-ID: <B7E0BEA478EBC24EBB2CF19F710760230170F1A8@red-msg-06.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>

Agreed.  I also like that the text correctly represents the definitions
of "prompt" that we discussed.

Heather Swayne

P.S. this e-mail was written using voice dictation technology so please
excuse any "voice mistakes"


-----Original Message-----
From: Charles McCathieNevile [mailto:charles@w3.org] 
Sent: Sunday, July 01, 2001 10:02 PM
To: Jan Richards
Cc: w3c-wai-au@w3.org
Subject: Re: Checkpoints for Guideline 3

I like these, but instead of the [limited Relative Priority] idea, I
would
list the relevant WCAG checkpoints with a note that the rest are not
applicable.

Chaals

On Mon, 25 Jun 2001, Jan Richards wrote:

  More rewrites. For 3.1 and 3.2, these include special notes that
  hopefully do a better job of limiting the scope of the relative
priority
  checkpoints:


[snip]

Received on Sunday, 15 July 2001 21:26:42 UTC