- From: William Loughborough <love26@gorge.net>
- Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2000 19:32:38 -0800
- To: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>, "Leonard R. Kasday" <kasday@acm.org>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
At 06:27 PM 12/14/00 -0800, Kynn Bartlett wrote:
>I continue to have very strong objections to the current Single-A,
>Double-A, Triple-A conformance scheme...I don't believe we have gotten to
>this issue at all yet"
I join Kynn in the first clause and can't believe he stated the last one.
This issue pre-dates the WG and possibly even the WAI. We have "gotten to"
it boringly often. We took a vote and I lost. Kynn did too if he voted.
At this time I'd rather discuss/argue/decide/consense/read/write about
something else. We lost that election and it's not important enough to be a
"deal breaker" that we have a multi-tiered system in which there's
"priority levels" with which I disagree.
Let's make the document better and defer yet another round of
campaigning/voting about conformance levels until a bit later. I hope Kynn
can get some people to vote different but it's more important that we get
into stuff like specifying "density levels" for the clear/simple stuff and
"appropriate to the task" reading levels and proof of the use of non-text
graphics to make stuff less daunting and how a multimedia
player/editor/creator can be specified without the inevitability of a major
retrofit next year.
--
Love.
ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE
Received on Thursday, 14 December 2000 22:32:44 UTC