- From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
- Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2000 11:27:58 -0700
- To: Claus Thøgersen <thoeg@get2net.dk>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Claus -- very good points. I especially like the idea of asking for whose benefit the logos are meant. A good way to do this would be to design our WCAG guidelines specifically for use as not only a "logo" (which is really the crudest form of compliance) but also as a detailed RDF statement. RDF -- for those of you who aren't familiar with it -- is basically like meta tags on steroids. They're a way of conveying meta information (information about information) using a standardized markup scheme which supports a variety of vocubularies. Using RDF, a site (or a page) could be labeled with a specific, detailed compliance rating. This could be read by the browser and information passed along to the user as appropriate -- for example, doing a query when hitting a site to determine if it is accessible to the user's needs. Additionally, the RDF itself could be converted to something visual using XSLT (since it's just an XML-derived language), and there is no reason that a textual or logo compliance claim could co-exist with an RDF compliance claim. --Kynn PS: I think William likes RDF. I just get that feeling. -- -- Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com> http://www.kynn.com/
Received on Sunday, 22 October 2000 14:34:26 UTC