- From: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
- Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 13:24:35 -0800
- To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
CH:: "we have pretty much set that idea aside since it seems to imply fixed, inflexible and not quite right for anyone." WL: The operative words therein are (IMHO) "we" and "seems". The "we" is probably mostly about the folks at CAST; the reached decision to set aside the idea(l) of UDL is not (at least so far) shared by many of us at WAI AUWG, particularly Charles, Jason, Gregory, and this old person. The "seems to imply" *may* carry the delusion we all suffer that often things just aren't what they seem to be. Whether it turns out that some of us's abhorrence of what we perceive as the "ghettoization" of text-only (and other "personalized" at the server end) Web sites is a misplaced sense of idealism (everyone, everything connected is, after all, a bit much!) or that "UDL requires..." is in fact unnecessarily dogmatic, won't have much bearing on how this all turns out, but on the whole I would hate to ignore the implications of "separate but equal" in our context. If anybody understands what I'm talking about, please let me know. I love Scott's and Chuck's goals but I feel pretty strongly that the ideals envisioned in WCAG and ATAG are achievable and *important*. Anybody (dis)agree??? -- Love. ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE http://dicomp.pair.com
Received on Tuesday, 28 December 1999 16:25:43 UTC