- From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@mysterylights.com>
- Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2001 17:20:40 -0000
- To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, "William Loughborough" <love26@gorge.net>, "Kynn Bartlett" <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
- Cc: "Wendy A Chisholm" <wendy@w3.org>, "Jason White" <jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.EDU.AU>
> I would say that you can fold even further and state as one > guideline, 'all people should be able to use the Web'. Very true indeed; I'd like to see it as an ontological hierarchy (e.g. a tree) rather than a list (of points). But of course, ultimately, WCAG 2.0 would be a Web - a modularized Web. Look at CSS3: that is now modularized...XHTML did it a long time ago. Modularization is the way forward I think, and neither lists or similar hierarchies are as expressive. So what then? Well, I think Kynn's gedankenexperiment of having a WCAG 1.5 was a highly valid one. Clear up WCAG, and then express it better... but I feel that the fight is lost and that we should have been discussing this a long time ago. I did propose that WCAG 2.0 be a Web of accessibility points before, but was strangely ignored... maybe I didn't set out a clear enough goal... Time to start work on WCAG 3.0 then? :-) -- Kindest Regards, Sean B. Palmer @prefix : <http://infomesh.net/2001/01/n3terms/#> . [ :name "Sean B. Palmer" ] has :homepage <http://infomesh.net/sbp/> .
Received on Monday, 22 January 2001 12:21:10 UTC