- From: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
- Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2000 14:12:00 -0400
- To: love26@gorge.net
- Cc: w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org
At 10:51 AM 2000-07-19 -0700, William Loughborough wrote: >AG:: "So this issue involves both (WCA and/or PF) and UA at least. And >ER for the AERT impact." > >WL: Not to mention some Working Groups in the W3C. > >I wonder if "navigation" is another category parallel to "content", >"presentation", and "structure" since it is a peculiarly hypertextish >entity with no precedent in the past like the others clearly have? - And >it is a frequent add-on to the "document proper"? A ToC is "structure" >but many "navbar" items relate to the site itself rather than the >contents thereof? > You are right, except that 'parallel' suggests too much independence. It is indeed yet another view or slice through the territory. But it is highly interdependent with the others, specifically a) structure; which is by the way a property of content that transcends pages; and b) the hyperlink-jump class of moving around within the web of content. The point is that we are asking for more of "orienting and navigable structure" than the hyperlinks alone provide. To look at navigation you have to have the hyperlinks on the table, and to look at structure you have to have sites on the table as well as the content categories returned by poking the "more like this" button. [All of which we will have to revisit when we get the intergroup process defined.] Al >-- >Love. > ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE >http://dicomp.pair.com >
Received on Wednesday, 19 July 2000 14:07:40 UTC