Re: Comments and edits for the DRAFT WCAG 2.0

GV:: "my first point is that many of our principles are way too

WL: I had hoped that would be the idea. They will almost always be in
the context of having Guidelines and Checkpoints associated with them
but they furnish a "lofty" view of what we're about. I seem to remember
the words "abstract" and "general" - which almost demands "academic".

I have no quarrel with all the rest of the (mostly
editorial/wordsmithing issues) comments in Gregg's post. But please
let's let the prinicples be Principles. They can say it in general
enough terms (and abstractly enough) that they might even resound. I
believe their brevity (and IMO clarity) trumps any complaints about
"academic" leading to a turn-off. The casual reader (whatever that is in
this case!) only has to look down one more line and be in a "real world"
description of the "how" and even a bit of "what".


Received on Monday, 14 August 2000 16:34:37 UTC