RE: Checkpoint 3.3

• From: Jason White <jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au>
• Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 10:36:42 +1000 (AEST)
• To: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
• Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.95.990715103517.2346A-100000@ariel.ucs.unimelb.EDU.AU>

I completely support Alan's position and would oppose any attempt to
reduce the priority of checkpoint 3.3. On the other hand, I would suggest
that the lack of a cross-reference from checkpoint 3.3 to checkpoint 5.3
should be treated as an erratum, as it clarifies the intended meaning
without changing it.

Received on Wednesday, 14 July 1999 20:36:50 UTC