- From: Daniel Dardailler <danield@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 30 Jan 1998 09:13:31 +0100
- To: Judy Brewer <JBrewer@w3.org>
- cc: Phill Jenkins <pjenkins@us.ibm.com>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, ij@w3.org, khudairi@w3.org
> >> WAI Accessibility Guidelines: Authoring Tools > >> WAI-AUTHTOOLS > >PJ:: I would add "hosting" to include other tools that (for example) > automatically generate pages from non-html sources that don't really have > end-author interaction. : Authoring and Hosting Tools. The code name > AUTHTOOLS is fine. DD:: I don't really understand what Hosting means in that context. I'd keep it just "Authoring Tools", and make sure "batch" not just "interactive" authoring programs are included.(The AU group charter doesn't specify, so it's for both). > >> WAI Accessibility Guidelines: Browsers > >> WAI-BROWSER > Actually, "User Agents" is very clear, and probably no more unknown than > "Hosting." Other reactions? DD:: I like Al's "Client Software" > >> WAI Accessibility Guidelines: Page Authoring > >> WAI-PAGEAUTH > >PJ:: I really like the 'old EXISTING' title of MARKUP guidelines. MARKUP > doesn't steer one to think of only pages, nor only authoring them, nor does > it sound like 'authoring tools' - which might be confusing later on. MARKUP > talks about the HTML source, whether authored by an individual using an > editor, or an authoring tools, or generated on the fly from pieces of > stuff, or style markup, or issues for whole sites (not just page). Maybe I > missed the rational for changing, but I like MARKUP best. : Markup. > WAI-MARKUP code name is fine. > > Markup was confusing to a # of people, we kept getting questions. DD:: I agree with the remark that says that these guidelines are really for people that *knows* about the Markup, not just people authoring pages with a nice GUI tool. So I prefer Markup too.
Received on Friday, 30 January 1998 03:14:50 UTC