- From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
- Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 08:32:13 -0800
- To: love26@gorge.net (William Loughborough), "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@mysterylights.com>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Cc: "Wendy A Chisholm" <wendy@w3.org>, "Jason White" <jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.EDU.AU>
At 5:54 PM -0800 1/21/01, William Loughborough wrote: >WHATEVER WE PUBLISH WILL EVOKE AN UNANSWERABLE RESPONSE. I only half agree with William -- I can definitely see where he is coming from on this and agree that whatever we produce, we will be unable to please -everyone-. However, I also do think that if we design a structure rather than a building, we can produce something which is adaptable, non-rigid and yet rigorous, which can be used in a variety of situations to increase accessibility of web sites. My ideal WCAG 2.0 would be something akin to XHTML modularization, allowing each developer to build their own accessibility plan. I am not convinced I'll see this happen, however. Maybe we need to do WCAG 1.5 (or 1.1) before we do WCAG 2.0 -- updating and correcting any WCAG 1.0 problems before attempting to do complete structural overhauls and philosophical shifts. While I might disagree with the basic premise of continued XHTML development, their game plan for spec development was sound, as they did not try to do three things at once, just one per spec release (convert to XML format; divide into modules; and only THEN start considering throwing out elements/adding new functionality). --Kynn -- Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com> http://www.kynn.com/
Received on Monday, 22 January 2001 11:51:09 UTC