- From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@mysterylights.com>
- Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000 14:46:50 -0000
- To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, "William Loughborough" <love26@gorge.net>
> And you must index the site with such features as fragIDs FragID's are good because of the backwards compatability, but I hope that in 5-10 years from now we'll all be using XPath/XPointer to reference stuff. It's a primary accessibility feature that you must be able to refer to stuff, otherwise by definition it isn't accessible! > and other semantic revelations. Like what? > encourage/require/simplify/+ the process of authors conveying what they > mean, not just how it's presented. I feel a quote coming up: "If you write what you mean rather than what you want done with it, then it can be repurposed so much better." This is in line with what Kynn was talking about, that if you have a source that says what you mean, you can then apply what you want done with it: presentation(content). Brilliant! Roll on CC/PP / XHTML 2.0. If these go to rec. before WCAG 2.0 (howver unlikely), won't that make the Techniques documents staggeringly difficult? Also, I wonder what mention should be made of XHTML Basic? We should be pushing for accessibility of information to all Web users...but if that means providing thousands of types of alternative content, people aren't going to do it. <sigh/> Kindest Regards, Sean B. Palmer http://uwimp.com/ "Perhaps, but let's not get bogged down in semantics." - Homer J. Simpson, BABF07.
Received on Friday, 22 December 2000 09:48:35 UTC