- From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com>
- Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2000 10:32:31 -0700
- To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
The verb "avoid" appears repeatedly in the WCAG 2.0 draft: * Avoid methods that interfere with navigation. * Avoid causing content to blink or flicker otherwise than under the control of the user. * Avoid causing pages to be refreshed or updated automatically, otherwise than in response to a user's request. We should eliminate the use of this term for a number of reasons: 1. It is "negative thinking" and requires the reader to _not_ do something, rather than to _do_ something. Proactive guidelines make for a better document. 2. It is unclear what "avoid" means. Does that mean don't do it? Does it mean do it but feel bad about it? Does it mean don't do it most of the time? 3. The ambiguity of the term effectively means (by a plain English interpretation of "avoid") that it is up to the reader's discretion whether or not the undesirable method is used. This is extremely poor as our guidelines need to be far more explicit _and_ should not assume that the reader has sufficient knowledge to make complex decisions regarding accessibility issues. Therefore, I propose the following: The verb "avoid" should be avoided -- er, should NEVER BE USED -- in WCAG 2.0. --Kynn, the guy who nitpicked for "author" vs. "user" in ATAG -- Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com> http://kynn.com/ Director of Accessibility, Edapta http://www.edapta.com/ Chief Technologist, Idyll Mountain Internet http://www.idyllmtn.com/ AWARE Center Director http://www.awarecenter.org/ Accessibility Roundtable Web Broadcast http://kynn.com/+on24 What's on my bookshelf? http://kynn.com/books/
Received on Friday, 29 September 2000 13:51:41 UTC