- From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
- Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2000 09:29:43 -0600
- To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Some short notes and an important call.... Short Notes (opinions not rulings) 1) When discussing universal design, we should be sure to decide if we are talking about universal design applied to the website - or applied to the page. I think dynamically generated presentations is clearly universal design of the site. I think I prefer pages that transform of themselves rather than server side assisted transformations, but I'm not sure which will actually give more people more usable pages. My guess is that transforming pages will more often provide users with all the information (e.g. less inadvertent editing out of info) but that server side would generate more usable pages for each domain 2) I don't think our guidelines should take a stand on how the pages are generated.... But rather on what makes a page accessible... If we can avoid how and stick to what - I think that is better. 3) I think server side solutions will wreak havoc with accessibility validators 4) We should look again at the interaction of our priority guidelines and regulations. In the past our priorities have been determined basically by what makes a page accessible.... Not by its ease of implementation. If regulations are going to say Priority 1 and 2 - then we need to think this through carefully. I hate to say this but I think we do. 5) I think we will have some very interesting discussions at CSUN. I am looking forward to everyone's views. -- IMPORTANT CALL -- BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY - If you think that we need to do something different with the guidelines You must come to CSUN with suggestions (or post them to this list). Specific suggestions for change. We are beginning to just run in circles with opinions and general concepts. I think that this stage is essential, but we also need to move on to the next one as well. At least we need to see what the options might look like if they were implemented. There are always problems with any approach. The question is, would an alternate approach be a better than what we have. To determine that we need to start looking at specifics as well as the general concepts. Specific ideas or suggestions for the guidelines or techniques doc anyone? Gregg -- ------------------------------ Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. Professor - Human Factors Dept of Ind. Engr. - U of Wis. Director - Trace R & D Center Gv@trace.wisc.edu, http://trace.wisc.edu/ FAX 608/262-8848 For a list of our listserves send "lists" to listproc@trace.wisc.edu
Received on Monday, 13 March 2000 10:33:03 UTC