- From: Lisa Seeman <seeman@netvision.net.il>
- Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2000 09:54:30 +0200
- To: "'William Loughborough'" <love26@gorge.net>, "WAI \(E-mail\)" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
well done, it looks good. Some people have told me about some fonts being almost impossible to read. In fact there was some research were a subgroup of dyslexics found it extremely hard (or even unable?) to read an irregular font (the letters were irregular and differently shaped). I think that this is incorporated in 3.2, but it is not explained. Should it be a best practice in the techniques. I am getting absolutely nowhere with a doable BILI technique. Al the Israeli webhosts I have been talking to have, well, changed the subject fast. Open to suggestions. Lisa -----Original Message----- From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of William Loughborough Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2000 3:24 AM To: Wendy A Chisholm; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org Subject: Re: 7 November 2000 WCAG 2.0 draft available At 07:56 PM 11/6/00 -0500, Wendy A Chisholm wrote: >Latest draft always available at: http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/ OTOH you've neglected me by not putting a "name" target for the new 1.3 guideline (tsk!). -- Love. ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE
Received on Tuesday, 7 November 2000 03:08:48 UTC