- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 12:20:19 -0500 (EST)
- To: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
- cc: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Hmm. ATAG more or less encompasses all of WCAG in about 3 different places (techniques included, for the techniques document). But more to the point, I agree that it is important to have named people working on things. The approach we are using at the moment in ATAG is to do this, but the named people are responsible for the content that comes from a particular generated view of the content, and they are collectively working on teh same source document. (This makes it a big document, but also means that people have what the other techniques documents contain in front of them when they are working on it. I found that very vlauable when editing ATAG stuff.) cheers Charles On Tue, 2 Jan 2001, Kynn Bartlett wrote: At 08:06 AM 1/2/2001 , Charles McCathieNevile wrote: >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. Charles, that is not a bad idea, but one of my chief concerns here is tracking and accountability. I feel that things work better if they are put in the hands of responsible people -- the more the better -- who take "stewardship" of a given set of information and who work to ensure that the information is complete and accurate. I think that right now we are somewhat "stalled" (despite making a great deal of philosophical progress) in terms of creating documents, which is our primary goal here. I think that by all (or most) of us getting involved and rolling up our sleeves and working on -specific- tasks, we can get the fires stoked up and get back on track. I also think that the size of information for WCAG 2.0 is larger than that necessary for ATAG -- because we are planning to deal with a number of different technologies (XHTML, SVG, SMIL, HTML, CSS, etc) in parallel. Separating out those parallel streams into separate tracks just makes the most sense to me. --Kynn -- 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 12:20:21 UTC