W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-eo@w3.org > April to June 2009

Re: Call for Review: Introduction to "How People with Disabilities Use the Web"

From: Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 01:09:32 -0400
To: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>,"EOWG (E-mail)" <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20090417052617.9C5844EF7D@homer.w3.org>
At 08:35 PM 4/16/2009 -0500, Shawn Henry wrote:
>Thank you for the review and comments, Judy.
>
>EOWG & Judy,
>
>Because there are other things that need to be updated, I edited it to:
>"The draft document will soon be updated to reflect current best 
>practice; for example, the references will be updated to WCAG 2.0 
>instead of WCAG 1.0."
>Let me know if you have any concerns with that.

It's fine.

>>I would also lean towards giving the time-frame as "within 2009" 
>>instead of "by 2010."
>
>Until that seems feasible, I would rather not put the earlier time. 
>It's better to beat the date than to miss it in this case. At any 
>time where it seems like we might get it done in 2009, we can change the date.
>Thanks,
>~Shawn
>
>Judy Brewer wrote:
>>Hi Shawn & EOWG:
>>In general, the Intro looks great, and thanks for the work on this.
>>Specifically, I think that it would benefit from directly saying, 
>>somewhere in the intro, that the examples are currently synched w/ 
>>WCAG 1.0 but that it will be updated to reflect WCAG 2.0.
>>Right now in the intro it says:
>>>The draft document will soon be updated to reflect current best 
>>>practice. We expect it to be completed and published by 2010, as 
>>>part of the WAI-AGE Project.
>>Perhaps this further clarification could be built briefly into that 
>>paragraph (though the wording "current best practice" looks 
>>carefully chosen so perhaps there is background that I am missing 
>>on this) by saying:
>>
>>>The draft document will soon be updated to reflect current best 
>>>practice (by using examples from WCAG 2.0 instead of WCAG 1.0). We 
>>>expect it to be completed and published by 2010, as part of the 
>>>WAI-AGE Project.
>>Adding the clarification at this point in the document would not 
>>only explain what is currently out of synch, but also reinforce 
>>that WCAG 2.0 is the current best practice, which I think it's 
>>useful to find additional ways to reinforce.
>>I would also lean towards giving the time-frame as "within 2009" 
>>instead of "by 2010."
>>Regards,
>>- Judy
>>At 09:20 PM 4/6/2009 -0500, Shawn Henry wrote:
>>>EOWG,
>>>
>>>Introduction to "How People with Disabilities Use the Web" has 
>>>been updated based on feedback from the EOWG mailing list [1] and 
>>>last week's EOWG discussion [2], and is ready for EOWG approval at:
>>>         http://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/people-use-web
>>>
>>>Additionally, EOWG identified the need to add a status note on the 
>>>main document. That is drafted at:
>>>         http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/Drafts/PWD-Use-Web/status#status
>>>
>>>Please send any additional comments *by Tuesday 14 April*. Please 
>>>indicate if your comments are high priority for addressing before 
>>>the information is officially published, or if your comments are 
>>>optional for consideration.
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>~Shawn
>>>
>>>
>>>[1] 
>>>http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2009AprJun/0000.html 
>>>  through http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-eo/2009AprJun/0007.html
>>>[2] http://www.w3.org/2009/04/03-eo-minutes#item01
>>>
>>>
>>>-----
>>>Shawn Lawton Henry
>>>W3C Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
>>>e-mail: shawn@w3.org
>>>phone: +1.617.395.7664
>>>about: http://www.w3.org/People/Shawn/
Received on Friday, 17 April 2009 05:26:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:55:58 UTC