- From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
- Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2000 08:19:56 -0800
- To: love26@gorge.net (William Loughborough)
- Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org, <@idyllmtn.com>
At 07:11 AM 12/22/2000 , William Loughborough wrote: >At 09:45 AM 12/22/00 -0500, Bailey, Bruce wrote: >>Do we want to write "guidelines" or "standards"? Do we need to choose? >Yes. No. >No matter what we call what we do, others will choose to selectively choose/use/enshrine/+ >In particular there are "standards" and various (de facto, dejure, etc.) standards. In our trade "standards" is most often used in connection with ISO stuff and I'll lay odds we don't want to go there for a while. OTOH what they get called is far less important than what they say. Eye on donut, not on hole. William, I think it is important because it shapes how we think about what we are doing. Whether or not they are actual official standards, the items we create will be different if we think of them as "rules" or if we think of them as "advice." WCAG 1.0 is inconsistent -- some were written as rules, some as advice -- and it is applied inconsistently as well. I would rather see us focus on one or the other, either we are writing as if we are writing rules, or we are writing as if we are writing advice. --Kynn -- 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/ What's on my bookshelf? http://kynn.com/books/
Received on Friday, 22 December 2000 11:32:12 UTC