Re: Breaking the Techniques "Writer's Block"

Here is an alternative approach (the one we are now using for ATAG
techniques).

Techniques are marked according to the things for which they are relevant.
(At the moment this is done using classes inside an HTML source, but if it
gets too big I will use external RDF).

Then the various documents are generated by splitting out a relevant
collection.

It is still necessary to select which documents we want to have. I think that
a smaller list is better than a bigger one to start with (and note that the
work on XML languages is currently a different document altogether, being
done by PF as per resolution at the last face to face meeting)

cheers

Charles McCN

On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, Sean B. Palmer wrote:

  > I think it's time that we start looking at developing technology-
  > specific techniques documents in parallel with the guidelines.

  I fully agree.
  FWIW, here is my attempt at a more definitive list of techniques documents
  than the one Kynn gave:-

  Techniques for:-
  - XHTML
    - CSS Style for XHTML
    - XHTML m12n
    - XHTML for XML Pure UIs?
  - {XML (DTDs)
  - XML Schemas}
    - CSS Styling for XML
  - SVG
  - SMIL
  - MathML?
  - WML?
  - Scripting langauges (ASP/PHP/CGI)?
  - ECMAScript???

  In regards to XHTML, maybe it can be split up according to priority levels
  (if any) for WCAG 2.0. In other words, a Techniques document for "priority
  1", one for "priority 2" etc.

  Kindest Regards,
  Sean B. Palmer
  http://infomesh.net/sbp/
  "Perhaps, but let's not get bogged down in semantics."
     - Homer J. Simpson, BABF07.


-- 
Charles McCathieNevile    mailto:charles@w3.org    phone: +61 (0) 409 134 136
W3C Web Accessibility Initiative                      http://www.w3.org/WAI
Location: I-cubed, 110 Victoria Street, Carlton VIC 3053, Australia
until 6 January 2001 at:
W3C INRIA, 2004 Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France

Received on Tuesday, 2 January 2001 11:07:45 UTC