W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-eo@w3.org > October to December 2003

Re: Standards harmonization document

From: Alan Chuter <achuter@teleservicios.com>
Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2003 19:22:38 +0200
Message-ID: <003101c390e5$715aea40$50ea2351@mshome.net>
To: "EOWG" <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>, "Judy Brewer" <jbrewer@w3.org>

I mean I'm commenting on it and rephrasing it, not rewriting it, of course.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Alan Chuter" <achuter@teleservicios.com>
To: "EOWG" <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>; "Judy Brewer" <jbrewer@w3.org>
Sent: Sunday, October 12, 2003 7:10 PM
Subject: Standards harmonization

> I've been reading and trying to rewrite this document
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/standard-harmon.html
> It occurs to me that what we actually want is one unified standard, right?
> Not a series of seperate but harmonized standards. I suggest that it might
> be better to talk of unification rather than harmonisation. I don't think
> comes across in the document. I realise that we don't want to brazenly
> that WCAG is the one and only true standard, but perhaps we can say
> unification and still be diplomatic. I'm also wondering about using
> "divergence" instead of "fragmentation."
> My work so far is at:
> http://www.infoescena.es/achuter/acceso/drafts/standard-harmon_akc.html
> I've dived into it where inspiration hit me, at the end of the
> but the changes are clearly marked with <ins> and <del>.
> I think it could be more readable if we assume that after a couple of
> paragraphs the context is clear, and find a way to substitute phrases like
> "standards harmonization" and "web accessibility" with something shorter
> (like "it" or "this").
> regards to all,
> Alan Chuter
> Fundosa Teleservicios, S.A.
> achuter@teleservicios.com
Received on Sunday, 12 October 2003 13:19:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:29:34 UTC