Re: Draft Reformulation of WCAG 2.0 - published 26 July 2000

I hate to harp on it, but it still bugs me to have to shift terminology in an
arbitrary way. And the checkpoints sound like they will be techniques, not
checkpoints.

I am not sure that Xforms makes a lot of difference to the interactivity
section - it presumably provides fgood ways to meet the requirements, but is
not the only possible technology (it is already feasible to build forms using
XML - some SVG and DOM stuff, for example, although that would be a crufde
way of doing it).

I would like to write about device-independent interaction methods - or at
least drag together the stuff I have written in several fora over the last
couple of years.

Cheers

Charles

On Tue, 8 Aug 2000, William Loughborough wrote:

  I love the first three and hope they are discussed at the Bristol
  Workshop on Designing for Device Independence. I think the fourth is too
  vague and the sixth doesn't rise to the level of a "principle". Not sure
  what to say about the fifth one. I feel it's implicit in the others,
  but...
  
  -- 
  Love.
              ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE
  http://dicomp.pair.com
  

--
Charles McCathieNevile    mailto:charles@w3.org    phone: +61 (0) 409 134 136
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative                      http://www.w3.org/WAI
Location: I-cubed, 110 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053
Postal: GPO Box 2476V, Melbourne 3001,  Australia

Received on Tuesday, 8 August 2000 18:26:30 UTC