w3c-wai-gl@w3.org from July to September 2001 by date

Monday, 1 October 2001

• Suggestion for List Posting Gregg Vanderheiden

Sunday, 30 September 2001

• Re: Does one design for interactivity or content? [Scripts-TECHS] Anne Pemberton

Monday, 1 October 2001

• Re: User and user needs conflict- BIG ISSUES REMAINING TO BE DISCUSSED Kynn Bartlett
• Re: User and user needs conflict- BIG ISSUES REMAINING TO BE DISCUSSED Kynn Bartlett

Sunday, 30 September 2001

• Re: User and user needs conflict- BIG ISSUES REMAINING TO BE DISCUSSED Jim Ley
• Re: Does one design for interactivity or content? [Scripts-TECHS] Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: Does one design for interactivity or content? [Scripts-TECHS] Jim Ley
• keep the bandwidth low, but illustrate was: Re: User and user needs conflict- BIG ISSUES REMAINING TO BE DISCUSSED Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: User and user needs conflict- BIG ISSUES REMAINING TO BE DISCUSSED Lisa Seeman

Saturday, 29 September 2001

• RE: suggestion for WCAG checklist Gregg Vanderheiden
• Re: suggestion for WCAG checklist William Loughborough
• suggestion for WCAG checklist Marja-Riitta Koivunen
• Does one design for interactivity or content? [Scripts-TECHS] Jonathan Chetwynd

Thursday, 27 September 2001

• Does anyone know of any other script wizards? Jonathan Chetwynd

Friday, 28 September 2001

• Re: [Scripts-TECHS] Comments on Script Techniques for WCAG20 Jim Ley
• [Scripts-TECHS] Comments on Script Techniques for WCAG20 Bjoern Hoehrmann
• Re: User and user needs conflict- BIG ISSUES REMAINING TO BE DISCUSSED Jim Ley
• Re: NEW CONSENSUS CANDIDATES FOR BIG ISSUES 6,9,10,12 Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: User and user needs conflict- BIG ISSUES REMAINING TO BE DISCUSSED Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: User and user needs conflict- BIG ISSUES REMAINING TO BE DISCUSSED Jason White
• User and user needs conflict- BIG ISSUES REMAINING TO BE DISCUSSED Lisa Seeman
• BIG ISSUES REMAINING TO BE DISCUSSED Gregg Vanderheiden
• NEW CONSENSUS CANDIDATES FOR BIG ISSUES 6,9,10,12 Gregg Vanderheiden

Thursday, 27 September 2001

• Site rating [was Re: Tone] William Loughborough
• Minutes for 27 September 2001 telecon Jo Miller
• Re: Tone Anne Pemberton
• Re: Tone Wendy A Chisholm
• Re: Tone Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: Tone Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: Tone Loretta Guarino Reid
• Re: Tone Wendy A Chisholm
• Re: Tone Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: Tone Wendy A Chisholm
• Script checker and a techniques document to support it. Jim Ley
• Re: Tone Anne Pemberton
• Re: Tone Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: Browser and Technology Support [Was: Re: [w3c-wai-gl] <none>] Jim Ley

Wednesday, 26 September 2001

• Re: Browser and Technology Support [Was: Re: [w3c-wai-gl] <none>] Anne Pemberton
• RE: Tone Charles F. Munat
• Re: Browser and Technology Support [Was: Re: [w3c-wai-gl] <none>] Jim Ley
• RE: Tone Anne Pemberton
• RE: Tone Charles F. Munat
• Re: Browser and Technology Support [Was: Re: [w3c-wai-gl] <none>] Anne Pemberton
• Re: Tone Anne Pemberton
• Re: Tone Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: Tool to aid with script conformance in pages. William Loughborough
• Tool to aid with script conformance in pages. Jim Ley
• Re: Tone Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: Browser and Technology Support [Was: Re: [w3c-wai-gl] <none>] Matt May
• Re: Browser and Technology Support [Was: Re: [w3c-wai-gl] <none>] Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: Browser and Technology Support [Was: Re: [w3c-wai-gl] <none>] Jim Ley
• Re: Tone Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: WCAG 1.0 CP 6.1 Considered Harmful Alan J. Flavell
• Re: WCAG 1.0 CP 6.1 Considered Harmful [was: Re: who does what] Anne Pemberton

Tuesday, 25 September 2001

• Re: recommended reading Anne Pemberton

Wednesday, 26 September 2001

• Re: Agenda Charles McCathieNevile
• Agenda Jason White

Tuesday, 25 September 2001

• Re: WCAG 1.0 CP 6.1 Considered Harmful Sean B. Palmer
• Re: WCAG 1.0 CP 6.1 Considered Harmful Al Gilman
• Re: WCAG 1.0 CP 6.1 Considered Harmful Alan J. Flavell
• Re: Browser and Technology Support [Was: Re: [w3c-wai-gl] <none>] Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: WCAG 1.0 CP 6.1 Considered Harmful [violates: who does what] Sean B. Palmer
• Re: WCAG 1.0 CP 6.1 Considered Harmful [was: Re: who does what] Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: WCAG 1.0 CP 6.1 Considered Harmful Sean B. Palmer
• Re: WCAG 1.0 CP 6.1 Considered Harmful [was: Re: who does what] Sean B. Palmer
• Re: WCAG 1.0 CP 6.1 Considered Harmful William Loughborough
• Re: WCAG 1.0 CP 6.1 Considered Harmful Alan J. Flavell
• Re: WCAG 1.0 CP 6.1 Considered Harmful [violates: who does what] Al Gilman
• Re: WCAG 1.0 CP 6.1 Considered Harmful [was: Re: who does what] William Loughborough
• WCAG 2.0 CP 4.4 Considered Harmful [was: Re: WCAG 1.0 CP 6.1...] Sean B. Palmer
• Re: WCAG 1.0 CP 6.1 Considered Harmful [was: Re: who does what] William Loughborough
• Re: Browser and Technology Support [Was: Re: [w3c-wai-gl] <none>] Matt May
• Re: WCAG 1.0 CP 6.1 Considered Harmful [was: Re: who does what] Wendy A Chisholm
• Re: WCAG 1.0 CP 6.1 Considered Harmful Sean B. Palmer
• WCAG 1.0 CP 6.1 Considered Harmful [was: Re: who does what] Sean B. Palmer
• Re: Browser and Technology Support [Was: Re: [w3c-wai-gl] <none Wendy A Chisholm
• Re: Browser and Technology Support [Was: Re: [w3c-wai-gl] <none>] Jim Ley
• Browser and Technology Support [Was: Re: [w3c-wai-gl] <none>] Wendy A Chisholm
• [HTML Techs] Re: who does what Re: The Alt/Object Problem [...] Wendy A Chisholm
• Re: [w3c-wai-gl] <none> Jim Ley
• Re: [w3c-wai-gl] <none> Matt May
• recommended reading William Loughborough
• Re: [w3c-wai-gl] <none> Jim Ley
• Re: Tone Judy Brewer
• Re: [w3c-wai-gl] <none> Matt May
• Tone Jonathan Chetwynd
• STOP - Re: AccessiBlog updated Wendy A Chisholm

Monday, 24 September 2001

• Re: AccessiBlog updated Anne Pemberton
• Stop this thread [was: Re: AccessiBlog updated] Judy Brewer
• Fw: Why Validate? Sean B. Palmer
• Re: AccessiBlog updated Matt May
• Re: AccessiBlog updated Kynn Bartlett
• Re: AccessiBlog updated Jonathan Chetwynd
• Web site Accessibility Verification software for Microsoft FrontPage Dana Louise Simberkoff
• RE: AccessiBlog updated Charles F. Munat
• RE: [webwatch] Appropriate Alt Text Al Gilman
• RE: AccessiBlog updated Kynn Bartlett
• RE: AccessiBlog updated Charles F. Munat
• Re: AccessiBlog updated Kynn Bartlett
• Re: AccessiBlog updated Joe Clark
• Re: AccessiBlog updated Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: AccessiBlog updated Anne Pemberton
• Re: AccessiBlog updated seeman
• Re: AccessiBlog updated Joe Clark
• Re: alt title and links seeman
• [w3c-wai-gl] <none> Iribar Jon
• Re: AccessiBlog updated Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: Same URI? [was: Re: BIG ISSUES] Jason White
• Re: CONSENSUS REVISED 9-20-01 Al Gilman

Sunday, 23 September 2001

• Re: AccessiBlog updated Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: [w3c-wai-gl] <none> Jim Ley
• Re: Same URI? [was: Re: BIG ISSUES] Charles McCathieNevile
• [w3c-wai-gl] <none> Gregg Vanderheiden

Saturday, 22 September 2001

• AccessiBlog updated Joe Clark
• Re: 20 Sept 2001 minutes Alan J. Flavell

Friday, 21 September 2001

• Re: Same URI? [was: Re: BIG ISSUES] Anne Pemberton
• Re: Same URI? Sean B. Palmer
• Re: Same URI? Sean B. Palmer
• Same URI? [was: Re: BIG ISSUES] Al Gilman
• Re: BIG ISSUES REVISED 9-20-01 (SEE BOTTOM OF NOTE) William Loughborough
• NORMATIVE (was Re: CONSENSUS REVISED 9-20-01) William Loughborough
• Re: how/what Anne Pemberton
• Re: CONSENSUS REVISED 9-20-01 Jason White
• Re: BIG ISSUES REVISED 9-20-01 (SEE BOTTOM OF NOTE) Jason White
• Re: CONSENSUS REVISED 9-20-01 Al Gilman
• Re: how/what William Loughborough
• Re: CONSENSUS REVISED 9-20-01 Anne Pemberton
• Re: BIG ISSUES Anne Pemberton

Thursday, 20 September 2001

• Re: how/what Anne Pemberton
• CONSENSUS REVISED 9-20-01 Gregg Vanderheiden
• BIG ISSUES REVISED 9-20-01 (SEE BOTTOM OF NOTE) Gregg Vanderheiden
• Re: 20 Sept 2001 minutes Jim Ley
• RE: 20 Sept 2001 minutes Charles F. Munat
• 20 Sept 2001 minutes Wendy A Chisholm
• regrets Matt May
• how/what William Loughborough

Wednesday, 19 September 2001

• Re: [w3c-wai-gl] <none> Jonathan Chetwynd
• [w3c-wai-gl] <none> Jim Ley
• Re: BIG ISSUES Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: [w3c-wai-gl] <none> Jonathan Chetwynd
• OOPs missed one Gregg Vanderheiden
• STATEMENTS WHERE CONSENSUS WAS NOT REACHED. Gregg Vanderheiden
• CONSENSUS Gregg Vanderheiden
• BIG ISSUES Gregg Vanderheiden
• Issue Elephants, consensus and discussion Gregg Vanderheiden
• [w3c-wai-gl] <none> Jim Ley
• Re: Agenda Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: UA/GL duplication of effort? Re: Review of Script Techniques for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (part 2.) Al Gilman
• Re: K-State example Al Gilman
• [w3c-wai-gl] <none> Jim Ley
• Re: UA/GL duplication of effort? Re: Review of Script Techniques for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (part 2.) Jim Ley
• Re: Content vs User Agent question Al Gilman
• Agenda Jason White

Tuesday, 18 September 2001

• Content vs User Agent question Loretta Guarino Reid
• [script] K-State example Al Gilman
• Re: UA/GL duplication of effort? Re: Review of Script Techniques for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (part 2.) Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: UA/GL duplication of effort? Re: Review of Script Techniques for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (part 2.) Jim Ley
• Re: UA/GL duplication of effort? Re: Review of Script Techniques for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (part 2.) Jim Ley
• who does what Re: The Alt/Object Problem [...] Al Gilman
• Re: UA/GL duplication of effort? Re: Review of Script Techniques for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (part 2.) Jim Ley
• The Alt/Object Problem [was: Re: media mix and universal connectedness] Sean B. Palmer
• Re: UA/GL duplication of effort? Re: Review of Script Techniques for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (part 2.) Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: media mix and universal connectedness, plus SENSES and CHOICES Katie Haritos-Shea
• Re: media mix and universal connectedness Anne Pemberton

Monday, 17 September 2001

• Re: media mix and universal connectedness Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: media mix and universal connectedness Anne Pemberton
• Re: media mix and universal connectedness William Loughborough
• Re: media mix and universal connectedness Anne Pemberton

Sunday, 16 September 2001

• Re: media mix and universal connectedness William Loughborough
• Re: media mix and universal connectedness Anne Pemberton
• Re: media mix and universal connectedness Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: media mix and universal connectedness Charles McCathieNevile

Saturday, 15 September 2001

• media mix and universal connectedness Al Gilman
• Re: sigint-humint was Re: definition of accessible: text is convenient William Loughborough
• Re: definition of accessible: text is convenient Anne Pemberton
• Are we having fun, yet? Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: sigint-humint was Re: definition of accessible: text is convenient Al Gilman
• sigint-humint was Re: definition of accessible: text is convenient Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: definition of accessible: text is convenient William Loughborough
• Re: definition of accessible: text is convenient Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: definition of accessible: text is convenient Al Gilman
• Re: definition of accessible: text is convenient William Loughborough
• definition of accessible: text is convenient Jonathan Chetwynd

Friday, 14 September 2001

• Re: Script Techniques for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 Al Gilman
• Re: UA/GL duplication of effort? Re: Review of Script Techniques for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (part 2.) Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: Script Techniques for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 Christopher Atkinson

Friday, 13 July 2001

• Connundrum and a Proposal to Address It Gregg Vanderheiden

Thursday, 13 September 2001

• Re: Consensus on Elephants Al Gilman
• Re: UA/GL duplication of effort? Re: Review of Script Techniques for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (part 2.) Charles McCathieNevile

Wednesday, 12 September 2001

• Re: UA/GL duplication of effort? Re: Review of Script Techniques for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (part 2.) Jim Ley
• Re: UA/GL duplication of effort? Re: Review of Script Techniques for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (part 2.) Al Gilman
• Re: UA/GL duplication of effort? Re: Review of Script Techniques for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (part 2.) Ian B. Jacobs
• UA/GL duplication of effort? Re: Review of Script Techniques for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (part 2.) Jonathan Chetwynd
• GJR's #wai IRC log (11 September 01 / 11:57:22 to 21:39:37) gregory j. rosmaita
• Re: Consensus on Elephants Anne Pemberton

Tuesday, 11 September 2001

• Re: Fwd: minutes, some before lunch, some this afternoon Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: Consensus on Elephants William Loughborough
• Re: Consensus on Elephants Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: Consensus on Elephants Al Gilman
• Re: Fwd: Re: switch users Anne Pemberton
• Consensus on Elephants Gregg Vanderheiden
• Re: Fwd: Re: switch users Al Gilman
• Re: f2f session is over (8:50pm boston time/5:50pm local time [US Pacific]) Aaron Swartz
• Re: the emperor's clothes (or lack thereof) Al Gilman
• Re: Fwd: minutes, some before lunch, some this afternoon Jason White

Monday, 10 September 2001

• Fwd: Re: switch users Anne Pemberton
• Fwd: minutes, some before lunch, some this afternoon Wendy A Chisholm
• Re: the emperor's clothes (or lack thereof) William Loughborough
• irc log for monday morning Charles McCathieNevile
• the emperor's clothes (or lack thereof) gregory j. rosmaita
• Re: On Procedure Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: On Procedure Jason White
• On Procedure Gregg Vanderheiden
• f2f regrets gregory j. rosmaita
• Comments on WCAG 2.0, collated Wendy A Chisholm

Sunday, 9 September 2001

• RE: Structure of deliverables: are we too PC for our own good? William Loughborough
• RE: conformance to functionality classes Re: Proposals: Priority and Conformance schemes Charles F. Munat
• RE: Structure of deliverables: are we too PC for our own good? Charles F. Munat
• Re: conformance to functionality classes Re: Proposals: Priority and Conformance schemes Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: Structure of deliverables: are we too PC for our own good? Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: Structure of deliverables: are we too PC for our own good? Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: Structure of deliverables: are we too PC for our own good? William Loughborough
• Re: Structure of deliverables: are we too PC for our own good? Al Gilman
• Re: Structure of deliverables: are we too PC for our own good? Jason White
• Re: Structure of deliverables: are we too PC for our own good? William Loughborough
• Re: Structure of deliverables: are we too PC for our own good? Jason White
• Re: conformance to functionality classes Re: Proposals: Priority and Conformance schemes Jason White

Saturday, 8 September 2001

• conformance to functionality classes Re: Proposals: Priority and Conformance schemes Charles McCathieNevile
• no conformance requirements Re: Proposals: Priority and Conformance schemes Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: Structure of deliverables: are we too PC for our own good? William Loughborough
• Re: Structure of deliverables: are we too PC for our own good? Al Gilman
• dyslexia: sources Al Gilman

Friday, 7 September 2001

• two birds with one stone, focus, and organization Al Gilman
• Re: Issues on WCAG 2.0 August 24th draft Jim Ley
• Issues on WCAG 2.0 August 24th draft Andi Snow-Weaver
• Re: Review of Script Techniques for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (part 2.) Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: Review of Script Techniques for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (part 2.) Jim Ley
• Proposals: Priority and Conformance schemes Jason White
• Structure of deliverables: guidelines and techniques documents Jason White
• Re: Review of Script Techniques for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (part 2.) Charles McCathieNevile

Thursday, 6 September 2001

• Minutes from 6 September 2001 WCAG WG Wendy A Chisholm
• regrets for today's call cyns@opendesign.com
• PDF Techniques for WCAG 1.0 and 2.0 Dated Sept 13th, 2001 Katie Haritos-Shea
• Re: question about 2.0 formats: Wendy A Chisholm
• Re: Accessibility Testing Lab Software/Hardware Andi Snow-Weaver
• Review of Script Techniques for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (part 3.) Jim Ley
• Re: Review of Script Techniques for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (part 2.) Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: Review of Script Techniques for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (part 2.) Jonathan Chetwynd
• Agenda Jason White

Wednesday, 5 September 2001

• RE: Accessibility Testing Lab Software/Hardware? Paul Bohman
• Accessibility Testing Lab Software/Hardware? Chiarito-Mazzarella,Jay
• Error fixed on agenda for F2F Wendy A Chisholm
• Review of Script Techniques for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (part 2.) Jim Ley
• Re: Review of Script Techniques for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (part 1.) Jonathan Chetwynd
• Review of Script Techniques for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 (part 1.) Jim Ley
• Re: Web user with dementia William Loughborough
• Web user with dementia Anne Pemberton
• Script Techniques for Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: WCAG 2.0 Feedback - General Jonathan Chetwynd
• WCAG 2.0 Feedback - General Graham Oliver
• WCAG 2.0 Feedback - Design Principles and the definition of Content Graham Oliver

Tuesday, 4 September 2001

• RE: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Anne Pemberton
• Re: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Jonathan Chetwynd
• RE: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Jason White
• RE: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Anne Pemberton

Sunday, 2 September 2001

• Akamai creates a number of streaming applications..... Jonathan Chetwynd

Saturday, 1 September 2001

• Re: akamai Matt May
• akamai Jonathan Chetwynd

Friday, 31 August 2001

• RE: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Charles F. Munat
• RE: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation William Loughborough
• Re: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Jonathan Chetwynd
• RE: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Anne Pemberton
• RE: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Anne Pemberton
• Re: Bandwidth as a constraint Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: Bandwidth as a constraint Anne Pemberton
• RE: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Charles F. Munat
• dead-reckoning was Re: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Jonathan Chetwynd
• RE: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Charles F. Munat
• RE: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Charles F. Munat
• RE: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Charles F. Munat
• Re: Bandwidth as a constraint Kynn Bartlett
• Bandwidth as a constraint Charles McCathieNevile

Thursday, 30 August 2001

• RE: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Anne Pemberton
• RE: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Charles McCathieNevile
• RE: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Anne Pemberton
• minutes for 30 Aug 2001 Loretta Guarino Reid
• RE: Agenda - regrets cyns@opendesign.com
• Agenda - regrets Jo Miller
• RE: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Charles F. Munat
• RE: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Charles F. Munat
• RE: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Charles F. Munat
• RE: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Anne Pemberton
• RE: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Charles F. Munat

Wednesday, 29 August 2001

• RE: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Anne Pemberton
• RE: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Charles F. Munat
• RE: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Anne Pemberton
• Re:Call for Review of the XML Accessibility Guidelines s.livingstone@btinternet.com
• Re: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Loretta Guarino Reid
• Re: Agenda - regrets Paul Bohman
• Re: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Jonathan Chetwynd
• Call for Review of the XML Accessibility Guidelines Daniel Dardailler
• RE: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Charles F. Munat
• RE: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Anne Pemberton
• RE: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Charles F. Munat
• RE: Checkpoint 1.2 clarifications Charles F. Munat
• Re: Cognition Simulation Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: Checkpoint 1.2 clarifications Charles McCathieNevile
• RE: Caption synchronization tolerance Charles McCathieNevile
• Agenda Jason White

Tuesday, 28 August 2001

• RE: Re: Alt keys verses accesskey gregory j. rosmaita
• ACCESSKEY-an actual strength in a perceived weakness gregory j. rosmaita
• Re: alt title and links gregory j. rosmaita
• Re: AccessKeys and what to use [resend with new attachment] gregory j. rosmaita
• Re: AccessKeys and what to use gregory j. rosmaita
• PDF of 24 August 2001 draft Wendy A Chisholm
• RE: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Anne Pemberton
• Re: WCAG 2.0 Comment: What Tells Me To label Input Controls gregory j. rosmaita
• review of:Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 W3C Working Draft 24 August 2001 David Poehlman
• RE: Caption synchronization tolerance Gregg Vanderheiden
• understanding vs implementing Re: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Jonathan Chetwynd
• regrets for thursday's call Wendy A Chisholm
• Another update to open issues list Wendy A Chisholm
• Issue tracking: I need your help! Wendy A Chisholm
• RE: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Charles F. Munat
• Checkpoint 1.2 clarifications Joe Clark
• suggested checkpoint title revision: David Poehlman
• question about 2.0 formats: David Poehlman
• Re: Caption synchronization tolerance Larry Goldberg
• Re: Caption synchronization tolerance geoff freed
• Re: Caption synchronization tolerance geoff freed
• Re: Executive Summary Anne Pemberton
• WCAG 2.0 Feedback - Perceived lack of clarity about target audience for Guidelines Document Graham Oliver
• WCAG 2.0 Comment: What Tells Me To label Input Controls Kelly Ford
• RE: Caption synchronization tolerance Jason White
• RE: Caption synchronization tolerance Charles F. Munat
• Re: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Jonathan Chetwynd
• a library of visual aids? Re: Cognition Simulation Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: Font Sizes - units of measure Phil Brown
• Font Sizes - units of measure Joe Clark
• Caption synchronization tolerance Joe Clark
• Executive Summary Gregg Vanderheiden
• Caption synchronization tolerance Gregg Vanderheiden

Monday, 27 August 2001

• RE: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Anne Pemberton
• Re: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Anne Pemberton
• Re: Cognition Simulation Anne Pemberton
• Re: Cognition Simulation Marja-Riitta Koivunen
• RE: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Charles F. Munat
• Re: Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Matt May
• Mail order catalogues was Re: Cognition Simulation Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: Cognition Simulation Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: semantics in style Sean B. Palmer
• Re: semantics in style Al Gilman
• Re: semantics in style William Loughborough
• Re: eating our own dog food Charles McCathieNevile
• open issues list updated per 23 august telecon discussion Wendy A Chisholm
• semantics in style Wendy A Chisholm
• audio-only covered by 1.2 and 1.1? Wendy A Chisholm
• Re: greek was Cognition Simulation Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: Cognition Simulation Marja-Riitta Koivunen
• Re: Cognition Simulation Anne Pemberton

Sunday, 26 August 2001

• Re: The Web in the news Anne Pemberton
• The Web in the news Charles F. Munat
• Re: Cognition Simulation Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: Issue #10 Anne Pemberton
• Re: Issue #10 Jason White

Saturday, 25 August 2001

• Re: Are the guidelines upside down? Sean B. Palmer
• RE: Are the guidelines upside down? Anne Pemberton
• RE: Are the guidelines upside down? Charles F. Munat
• RE: Disability Type Analysis of WCAG 1.0 Charles F. Munat
• Re: Are the guidelines upside down? Anne Pemberton
• Re: Are the guidelines upside down? William Loughborough
• RE: Disability Type Analysis of WCAG 1.0 Anne Pemberton
• RE: Disability Type Analysis of WCAG 1.0 Charles F. Munat
• Are the guidelines upside down? Charles F. Munat
• RE: Disability Type Analysis of WCAG 1.0 Anne Pemberton
• RE: Disability Type Analysis of WCAG 1.0 Charles F. Munat
• RE: Disability Type Analysis of WCAG 1.0 Charles F. Munat
• RE: Disability Type Analysis of WCAG 1.0 Charles F. Munat
• Re: Saturday AM lyric Anne Pemberton
• RE: Disability Type Analysis of WCAG 1.0 Kynn Bartlett
• RE: Disability Type Analysis of WCAG 1.0 Kynn Bartlett
• RE: Disability Type Analysis of WCAG 1.0 Kynn Bartlett
• Saturday AM lyric William Loughborough
• RE: Cognition Simulation Anne Pemberton
• RE: Cognition Simulation Anne Pemberton
• Re: AccessKeys and what to use Charles McCathieNevile
• RE: Disability Type Analysis of WCAG 1.0 Charles F. Munat

Friday, 24 August 2001

• RE: Disability Type Analysis of WCAG 1.0 Paul Bohman
• Re: Cognition Simulation Anne Pemberton
• RE: Cognition Simulation Charles McCathieNevile
• RE: Cognition Simulation Paul Bohman
• RE: Disability Type Analysis of WCAG 1.0 Charles F. Munat
• RE: Disability Type Analysis of WCAG 1.0 Charles F. Munat
• RE: Cognition Simulation Charles F. Munat
• RE: Disability Type Analysis of WCAG 1.0 Paul Bohman
• Re: Cognition Simulation Marti McCuller
• Cognition Simulation Anne Pemberton
• RE: Data models? Al Gilman
• RE: Data models? Charles F. Munat
• Re: Data models? Al Gilman
• Re: Data models? Loretta Guarino Reid
• Data models? Charles F. Munat
• Re: Disability Type Analysis of WCAG 1.0 Charles F. Munat
• Re: Caption synchronization tolerance by way of Wendy A Chisholm
• WCAG 2.0 24 August 2001 Public Working Draft Wendy A Chisholm
• Re: [proposal] additional success criterion for WCAG2 CP 1.5 gregory j. rosmaita
• Re: Against WCAG 1.0 style priorities->conformance Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: Caption synchronization tolerance Charles McCathieNevile
• Against WCAG 1.0 style priorities->conformance Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Caption synchronization tolerance William Loughborough
• Re: Caption synchronization tolerance geoff freed
• Re: Issue #10 Anne Pemberton
• Re: Checkpoint views Sean B. Palmer

Thursday, 23 August 2001

• Re: Eating one's own dog food Anne Pemberton
• Caption synchronization tolerance Joe Clark
• Re: Issue #10 Jason White
• Re: Checkpoint views William Loughborough
• Re: Issue #10 Matt May
• Re: Eating one's own dog food Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: Eating one's own dog food Anne Pemberton
• Checkpoint views Charles F. Munat
• RE: In defense of flame wars Charles F. Munat
• Issue #10 Charles F. Munat
• Re: Eating one's own dog food Matt May
• Re: WCAG In Haiku; From William's Terse Version; Hope These Are Helpful Sean B. Palmer
• Re: WCAG In Haiku; From William's Terse Version; Hope These Are Helpful Marja-Riitta Koivunen
• Re: [proposal] additional success criterion for WCAG2 CP 1.5 Al Gilman
• 23 August 2001 WCAG WG minutes Wendy A Chisholm
• What is the target audience for the guidelines? <eom> Graham Oliver
• Re: Eating one's own dog food Charles McCathieNevile
• [proposal] additional success criterion for WCAG2 CP 1.5 gregory j. rosmaita
• Re: Eating one's own dog food Anne Pemberton
• Re: WCAG In Haiku; From William's Terse Version; Hope These Are Helpful Sean B. Palmer
• Re: AccessKeys and what to use Al Gilman
• Re: Alt keys verses accesskey gregory j. rosmaita
• Re: Alt keys verses accesskey gregory j. rosmaita
• WCAG 2 issue #1 Charles McCathieNevile
• RE: Open issue #55 Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: Eating one's own dog food Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: Eating one's own dog food Anne Pemberton
• Re: Eating one's own dog food Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: Eating one's own dog food Anne Pemberton
• RE: Multiple guidelines views (views) Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: Eating one's own dog food Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: Research Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: Research Scott Luebking
• RE: Multiple guidelines views (views) Gregg Vanderheiden
• Research Gregg Vanderheiden
• Eating one's own dog food William Loughborough
• Re: 3.3, what now, what next? Anne Pemberton

Wednesday, 22 August 2001

• Re: Open issue #50 Anne Pemberton
• Re: Modularization proposals Sean B. Palmer
• RE: Open issue #55 cyns@opendesign.com
• RE: In defense of flame wars Paul Bohman
• RE: Agenda Charles F. Munat
• Re: WCAG In Haiku; From William's Terse Version; Hope These Are Helpful Anne Pemberton
• Re: WCAG In Haiku; From William's Terse Version; Hope These Are Helpful William Loughborough
• Re: In defense of flame wars Anne Pemberton
• Re: Higher Profile for Non-Blind Disabled Users Anne Pemberton
• Re: In defense of flame wars Kynn Bartlett
• In defense of flame wars Charles F. Munat
• updated checkpoint mapping Wendy A Chisholm
• Re: WCAG In Haiku; From William's Terse Version; Hope These Are Helpful Sean B. Palmer
• RE: Agenda Charles McCathieNevile
• RE: Agenda cyns@opendesign.com
• Re: WCAG In Haiku; From William's Terse Version; Hope These Are Helpful Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: Issue #10, disability specific information and server side stuff Al Gilman
• Re: WCAG In Haiku; From William's Terse Version; Hope These Are Helpful William Loughborough
• Re: Open issue #54 Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: WCAG In Haiku; From William's Terse Version; Hope These Are Helpful Charles McCathieNevile
• RE: Agenda Al Gilman
• Re: Open issue #56 Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: WCAG In Haiku; From William's Terse Version; Hope These Are Helpful Al Gilman
• Open issue #56 Paul Bohman
• Open issue #50 Paul Bohman
• Open issue #50 Paul Bohman
• Open issue #55 Paul Bohman
• Re: WCAG In Haiku; From William's Terse Version; Hope These Are Helpful Matt May
• Open issue #54 Paul Bohman
• Open issue 53 Paul Bohman
• RE: Agenda Paul Bohman
• Re: WCAG In Haiku; From William's Terse Version; Hope These Are Helpful Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: 3.3, what now, what next? Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: Agenda Wendy A Chisholm
• Re: WCAG In Haiku; From William's Terse Version; Hope These Are Helpful Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: Higher Profile for Non-Blind Disabled Users William Loughborough
• Re: Higher Profile for Non-Blind Disabled Users Matt May
• WCAG In Haiku; From William's Terse Version; Hope These Are Helpful Sean B. Palmer
• 3.3, what now, what next? Al Gilman
• reviews/comments William Loughborough
• Re: Higher Profile for Non-Blind Disabled Users Anne Pemberton
• Re: Higher Profile for Non-Blind Disabled Users Anne Pemberton
• Agenda Jason White
• Re: Can't We All Just Get Along? Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: Higher Profile for Non-Blind Disabled Users Matt May
• Higher Profile for Non-Blind Disabled Users Kynn Bartlett

Monday, 20 August 2001

• RE: Can't We All Just Get Along? Marja-Riitta Koivunen

Tuesday, 21 August 2001

• Infamous article now online Joe Clark
• Re: Modularization proposals Jonathan Chetwynd
• RE: Modularization proposals Charles F. Munat
• Re: Modularization proposals Al Gilman
• RE: Guideline 1 examples Kynn Bartlett
• RE: Why we will never find a good version of 3.3 (and what's wrong with WCAG 2.0) Kynn Bartlett
• RE: Walking A Mile In Someone Else's Shoes Anne Pemberton
• RE: Guideline 1 examples Gregg Vanderheiden
• RE: Why we will never find a good version of 3.3 (and what's wrong with WCAG 2.0) Gregg Vanderheiden
• RE: Walking A Mile In Someone Else's Shoes Charles McCathieNevile
• RE: Walking A Mile In Someone Else's Shoes Anne Pemberton
• Re: Walking A Mile In Someone Else's Shoes Marc David Johnson

Monday, 20 August 2001

• Re: Walking A Mile In Someone Else's Shoes Anne Pemberton

Tuesday, 21 August 2001

• Modularization proposals Jason White
• RE: Multiple guidelines views (views) Wendy A Chisholm
• RE: A PROPOSAL TO SPLIT THE WCAG IN THREE. Al Gilman

Monday, 20 August 2001

• RE: Modularization Kynn Bartlett
• RE: Walking A Mile In Someone Else's Shoes Kynn Bartlett
• RE: Modularization Charles F. Munat
• RE: Walking A Mile In Someone Else's Shoes Charles F. Munat
• RE: Multiple guidelines views (views) cyns@opendesign.com
• Peace! William Loughborough
• Modularization Joe Clark
• RE: A PROPOSAL TO SPLIT THE WCAG IN THREE. Charles F. Munat
• RE: A PROPOSAL TO SPLIT THE WCAG IN THREE. Please read this. I'm serious. Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Multiple guidelines views (views) Kynn Bartlett
• Walking A Mile In Someone Else's Shoes Kynn Bartlett
• RE: A PROPOSAL TO SPLIT THE WCAG IN THREE. Kynn Bartlett
• Multiple guidelines views (views) Charles F. Munat
• RE: A PROPOSAL TO SPLIT THE WCAG IN THREE. Please read this. I'm serious. Anne Pemberton
• RE: A PROPOSAL TO SPLIT THE WCAG IN THREE. Please read this. I'm serious. Anne Pemberton
• RE: A PROPOSAL TO SPLIT THE WCAG IN THREE. Please read this. I'm serious. Charles F. Munat
• RE: alt title and links Charles F. Munat
• Re: A PROPOSAL TO SPLIT THE WCAG IN THREE. Jonathan Chetwynd
• RE: A PROPOSAL TO SPLIT THE WCAG IN THREE. Charles F. Munat
• RE: A PROPOSAL TO SPLIT THE WCAG IN THREE. Charles F. Munat
• RE: A PROPOSAL TO SPLIT THE WCAG IN THREE. Please read this. I'm serious. Charles F. Munat
• RE: A PROPOSAL TO SPLIT THE WCAG IN THREE. Please read this. I'm serious. Charles F. Munat
• Re: A PROPOSAL TO SPLIT THE WCAG IN THREE. Please read this. I'm serious. Anne Pemberton
• RE: Guideline 1 examples Kynn Bartlett
• RE: Guideline 1 examples Gregg Vanderheiden
• RE: alt title and links Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Functional equivalents vs. descriptions Kynn Bartlett
• RE: Guideline 1 examples Kynn Bartlett
• RE: A PROPOSAL TO SPLIT THE WCAG IN THREE. Please read this. I'm serious. Kynn Bartlett
• Re: A PROPOSAL TO SPLIT THE WCAG IN THREE. Please read this. I'm serious. Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Why we will never find a good version of 3.3 (and what's wrong with WCAG 2.0) Kynn Bartlett
• Re: A PROPOSAL TO SPLIT THE WCAG IN THREE. Please read this. I'm serious. Al Gilman
• Splitting guidelines Gregg Vanderheiden
• RE: A PROPOSAL TO SPLIT THE WCAG IN THREE. Please read this. I'm serious. Gregg Vanderheiden
• Re: A PROPOSAL TO SPLIT THE WCAG IN THREE. Please read this. I'm serious. Marc David Johnson
• RE: A PROPOSAL TO SPLIT THE WCAG IN THREE. Please read this. I'm serious. Charles McCathieNevile
• RE: A PROPOSAL TO SPLIT THE WCAG IN THREE. Please read this. I'm serious. Charles McCathieNevile
• RE: A PROPOSAL TO SPLIT THE WCAG IN THREE. Please read this. I'm serious. Charles F. Munat
• RE: A PROPOSAL TO SPLIT THE WCAG IN THREE. Please read this. I'm serious. Charles F. Munat
• Re: A PROPOSAL TO SPLIT THE WCAG IN THREE. Please read this. I'm serious. Anne Pemberton
• Re: A PROPOSAL TO SPLIT THE WCAG IN THREE. Please read this. I'm serious. Charles McCathieNevile
• RE: Can't We All Just Get Along? Charles F. Munat
• A PROPOSAL TO SPLIT THE WCAG IN THREE. Please read this. I'm serious. Charles F. Munat
• RE: Guideline 1 examples Charles F. Munat
• Why we will never find a good version of 3.3 (and what's wrong with WCAG 2.0) Charles F. Munat
• Functional equivalents vs. descriptions Charles F. Munat
• RE: alt title and links Charles F. Munat
• Re: the 4 colour theorem, and an alternative to the current list of guidelines. Kynn Bartlett
• the 4 colour theorem, and an alternative to the current list of guidelines. Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: Title testing Kynn Bartlett
• Title testing Joe Clark

Sunday, 19 August 2001

• RE: Possible deletion Gregg Vanderheiden
• RE: Rewrite of Introduction: Purpose Gregg Vanderheiden
• RE: Can't We All Just Get Along? Gregg Vanderheiden
• Re: alt title and links Alan J. Flavell
• JAWS, alt, and title (was Re: alt title and links) Jo Miller
• Re: alt title and links Al Gilman
• Re: alt title and links Alan J. Flavell
• Re: alt title and links Alan J. Flavell
• Re: Tech Players Question IAB's Rich Media Guidelines Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: Can't We All Just Get Along? Anne Pemberton
• RE: Simplest and clearest... Kynn Bartlett
• RE: Simplest and clearest... Kynn Bartlett
• Can't We All Just Get Along? Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Guideline 1 examples Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Simplest and clearest... Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Simplest and clearest... Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: Guideline 1 examples Charles McCathieNevile

Saturday, 18 August 2001

• Re: Guideline 1 examples Anne Pemberton
• RE: Simplest and clearest... Anne Pemberton
• Guideline 1 examples Charles F. Munat
• RE: Simplest and clearest... Anne Pemberton
• RE: Simplest and clearest... Charles F. Munat
• Re: Action item: "default" Anne Pemberton
• Re: Action item: "default" Matt May
• Re: Action item: "default" Anne Pemberton
• Re: Action item: "default" Matt May
• Re: Action item: "default" Al Gilman
• Re: Action item: "default" Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Action item: "default" Anne Pemberton
• Action item: "default" cyns@opendesign.com
• Tech Players Question IAB's Rich Media Guidelines Joe Clark
• RE: Simplest and clearest... Anne Pemberton

Friday, 17 August 2001

• Re: A brief examination of purpose. Anne Pemberton
• RE: Rewrite of Introduction: Purpose Charles F. Munat
• A brief examination of purpose. Charles F. Munat
• RE: Simplest and clearest... Charles F. Munat
• Re: alt title and links Matt May
• Re: Rewrite of Introduction: Purpose Anne Pemberton
• Re: Rewrite of Introduction: Purpose Jo Miller
• alt title and links Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: Simplest and clearest... Anne Pemberton
• Fwd: web access - ADA Laws Anne Pemberton
• Re: Rewrite of Introduction: Purpose Anne Pemberton
• Rewrite of Introduction: Purpose Charles F. Munat
• Re: Simplest and clearest... Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Simplest and clearest... Al Gilman
• Re: Possible deletion Al Gilman
• Re: Possible deletion Kynn Bartlett
• Simplest and clearest... Kynn Bartlett

Thursday, 16 August 2001

• Re: Possible deletion Paul Bohman
• Re: Wording issues Anne Pemberton
• Possible deletion Gregg Vanderheiden
• 8/16 Meeting Minutes Loretta Guarino Reid
• techniques, and a separate checkpoint, for word use Al Gilman
• "Real-time commentary" Joe Clark
• Wording issues Joe Clark
• Attractiveness and v.2 Charles F. Munat
• Regrets for today's call Andi Snow-Weaver
• Advocacy in WCAG 2.0 Charles F. Munat
• Re: Wording issues Al Gilman
• Re: New draft - 14 August 2001 Jo Miller
• le mot juste [was Wording issues] Jo Miller
• Re: Wording issues Paul Bohman
• Re: Wording issues Paul Bohman

Friday, 17 August 2001

• accesskey defaults seeman

Thursday, 16 August 2001

• Re: Wording issues Anne Pemberton
• Re: Wording issues Al Gilman
• Re: Wording issues Joe Clark
• Re: New draft - 14 August 2001 Jo Miller
• Re: Wording issues Jason White

Wednesday, 15 August 2001

• Wording issues Joe Clark
• Re: New draft - 14 August 2001 Loretta Guarino Reid
• Re: Illustrating example (was Re: New draft - 14 August 2001) Anne Pemberton
• Illustrating example (was Re: New draft - 14 August 2001) Wendy A Chisholm
• RE: New draft - 14 August 2001 Charles F. Munat
• Re: New draft - 14 August 2001 Anne Pemberton

Tuesday, 14 August 2001

• Alt keys verses accesskey Daniel Newman

Wednesday, 15 August 2001

• New draft - 14 August 2001 Wendy A Chisholm

Tuesday, 14 August 2001

• Agenda Jason White
• Further infamy for Joe Clark Joe Clark
• WCAG Usability Testing - update and call for comments David Sloan

Monday, 13 August 2001

• RE: Proposed edit to note -- to avoid conflict with criteria Charles McCathieNevile
• 4.3 - descrambled Gregg Vanderheiden
• RE: Proposed edit to note -- to avoid conflict with criteria Gregg Vanderheiden

Sunday, 12 August 2001

• RE: add a sentence? Charles McCathieNevile
• RE: add a sentence? Gregg Vanderheiden
• Re: add a sentence? Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: Proposed edit to note -- to avoid conflict with criteria Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: Rewrites Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: Proposed edit to note -- to avoid conflict with criteria Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Proposed edit to note -- to avoid conflict with criteria Charles McCathieNevile
• Proposed edit to note -- to avoid conflict with criteria Gregg Vanderheiden
• add a sentence? Gregg Vanderheiden
• Re: Rewrites Emmanuelle Gutiérrez y Restrepo
• Re: Multimode expression Kynn Bartlett
• Multimode expression Joe Clark

Saturday, 11 August 2001

• Re: forwarded message from Joe Clark Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Rewrites Kynn Bartlett
• Re: class use (notional vs. blindless grouping) Sean B. Palmer
• Re: class use (notional vs. blindless grouping) Sean B. Palmer
• Re: class use (notional vs. blindless grouping) Al Gilman
• Re: class use (notional vs. blindless grouping) Sean B. Palmer
• Rewrites Joe Clark
• RE: 3.3 clear and simple Re: 9 August 2001 WCAG WG telecon minutes Gregg Vanderheiden
• class use (notional vs. blindless grouping) Al Gilman
• Re: forwarded message from Joe Clark Anne Pemberton
• forwarded message from Joe Clark Jason White

Friday, 10 August 2001

• Re: 3.3 clear and simple Re: 9 August 2001 WCAG WG telecon minutes Al Gilman
• Re: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Anne Pemberton
• Re: 9 August 2001 WCAG WG telecon minutes Anne Pemberton
• Re: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Matt May
• demographic considerations (was Re: Including content modes in 4.1) gregory j. rosmaita
• Re: 3.3 clear and simple Re: 9 August 2001 WCAG WG telecon minutes Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: 9 August 2001 WCAG WG telecon minutes Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: 3.3 clear and simple Re: 9 August 2001 WCAG WG telecon minutes gregory j. rosmaita
• Re: 9 August 2001 WCAG WG telecon minutes Wendy A Chisholm
• 3.3 clear and simple Re: 9 August 2001 WCAG WG telecon minutes Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: 9 August 2001 WCAG WG telecon minutes Anne Pemberton
• Re: 9 August 2001 WCAG WG telecon minutes Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: 9 August 2001 WCAG WG telecon minutes Anne Pemberton
• Re: 9 August 2001 WCAG WG telecon minutes Jo Miller
• Re: 9 August 2001 WCAG WG telecon minutes Jo Miller
• Re: Paper "Designing for users with cognitive disabilities" Anne Pemberton
• Re: 9 August 2001 WCAG WG telecon minutes Anne Pemberton
• Re: 9 August 2001 WCAG WG telecon minutes Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: 9 August 2001 WCAG WG telecon minutes Anne Pemberton
• Greetings Charles F. Munat
• 2.2 - proposal for success criteria Wendy A Chisholm
• 9 August 2001 WCAG WG telecon minutes Wendy A Chisholm

Thursday, 9 August 2001

• last minute regrets cyns@opendesign.com
• Re: Agenda Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: Agenda Wendy A Chisholm
• Request to Join Charles F. Munat
• Re: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Anne Pemberton
• Request to Join Charles F. Munat
• WCAG 2.0 Criteria Review For checkpoints up to 2.7 Gregg Vanderheiden
• RE: 1.4 and ALT text Charles McCathieNevile
• RE: 1.4 and ALT text Steven Livingstone
• Re: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Marja-Riitta Koivunen
• Re: Agenda Charles McCathieNevile

Tuesday, 7 August 2001

• Re: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Marja-Riitta Koivunen

Thursday, 9 August 2001

• Re: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Anne Pemberton
• Re: RE 1.2-.13 Charles McCathieNevile

Tuesday, 7 August 2001

• RE: 1.4 and ALT text Gregg Vanderheiden

Thursday, 9 August 2001

• RE 1.2-.13 Gregg Vanderheiden

Wednesday, 8 August 2001

• Agenda Jason White

Tuesday, 7 August 2001

• Paper "Designing for users with cognitive disabilities" Kynn Bartlett

Thursday, 9 August 2001

• Regrets Katie Haritos-Shea
• Update on W3C/WAI mailing lists Judy Brewer
• Re: Agenda Paul Bohman
• Agenda Jason White
• Test... Wendy A Chisholm

Monday, 6 August 2001

• RE: New checkpoint: identifying language Tim Noonan
• F2F logistics Gregg Vanderheiden
• Re: 1.4 and ALT text Charles McCathieNevile
• 1.4 and ALT text Gregg Vanderheiden
• Re: Minutes from 02 August 2001 telecon Wendy A Chisholm
• RE: linking? RE: Proposal for 3.4 Success Criteria Anne Pemberton
• RE: linking? RE: Proposal for 3.4 Success Criteria Joel Sanda
• Re: Plug for the insightful blind folks Anne Pemberton
• Re: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Anne Pemberton
• Re: linking? RE: Proposal for 3.4 Success Criteria (fwd) Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Plug for the insightful blind folks Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Missing 3.4 thread stuff Anne Pemberton
• Re: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Marja-Riitta Koivunen
• Re: linking? RE: Proposal for 3.4 Success Criteria (fwd) Charles McCathieNevile
• Missing 3.4 thread stuff Charles McCathieNevile
• RE: linking? RE: Proposal for 3.4 Success Criteria Charles McCathieNevile
• RE: linking? RE: Proposal for 3.4 Success Criteria Anne Pemberton
• Plug for the insightful blind folks Anne Pemberton
• RE: linking? RE: Proposal for 3.4 Success Criteria Joel Sanda
• Re: Criterion Jason White
• RE: Proposal for 3.4 Success Criteria Joe Clark

Sunday, 5 August 2001

• Fwd: Alertbox: First Rule of Usability? Don't Listen to Users Scott Luebking
• RE: Criterion Gregg Vanderheiden
• RE: Minutes from 02 August 2001 telecon Kynn Bartlett
• RE: Proposal for 3.4 Success Criteria Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Criterion Kynn Bartlett
• RE: Criterion Gregg Vanderheiden
• RE: Minutes from 02 August 2001 telecon Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: Criterion Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: Criterion Jason White
• Re: Criterion Charles McCathieNevile

Saturday, 4 August 2001

• RE: Combing checkpoints 1.2 and 1.3 Anne Pemberton
• RE: Proposal for 3.4 Success Criteria Joel Sanda
• Criterion Gregg Vanderheiden
• RE: Combing checkpoints 1.2 and 1.3 Gregg Vanderheiden
• RE: Minutes from 02 August 2001 telecon Gregg Vanderheiden
• RE: Proposal for 3.4 Success Criteria Gregg Vanderheiden
• Proposal for 3.4 Success Criteria Joel Sanda
• RE: Proposal deriving from checkpoint 2.1 Anne Pemberton
• Re: Minutes from 02 August 2001 telecon Charles McCathieNevile
• RE: Combing checkpoints 1.2 and 1.3 Charles McCathieNevile
• RE: Proposal deriving from checkpoint 2.1 Charles McCathieNevile
• RE: Proposal deriving from checkpoint 2.1 Gregg Vanderheiden
• RE: Combing checkpoints 1.2 and 1.3 Gregg Vanderheiden
• RE: Combing checkpoints 1.2 and 1.3 Gregg Vanderheiden
• RE: Combing checkpoints 1.2 and 1.3 Gregg Vanderheiden

Friday, 3 August 2001

• RE: New checkpoint: identifying language Kynn Bartlett
• RE: New checkpoint: identifying language Gregg Vanderheiden
• Re: Proposal deriving from checkpoint 2.1 Anne Pemberton
• Re: Combing checkpoints 1.2 and 1.3 Anne Pemberton
• Re: New checkpoint: identifying language Anne Pemberton
• Re: Proposal deriving from checkpoint 2.1 Wendy A Chisholm
• New checkpoint: identifying language Wendy A Chisholm
• Combing checkpoints 1.2 and 1.3 Wendy A Chisholm
• Open issues from 26 July 2001 draft Wendy A Chisholm
• Re: Illustrations for content Anne Pemberton
• Re: examples of a variety of sites that include illu Anne Pemberton
• Re: examples of a variety of sites that include illu Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: examples of a variety of sites that include illu Joe Clark
• Re: Illustrations for content Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Illustrations for content Jason White

Thursday, 2 August 2001

• RE: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again Anne Pemberton
• Minutes from 02 August 2001 telecon Wendy A Chisholm
• RE: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again Joel Sanda
• Re: checkpoint 3.4 again. Emmanuelle Gutiérrez y Restrepo
• Illustrations for content Kynn Bartlett
• RE: examples of a variety of sites that include illustrations of concepts (i.e., examples of 3.4) Anne Pemberton
• RE: examples of a variety of sites that include illustrations of concepts (i.e., examples of 3.4) Joel Sanda
• RE: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again Joel Sanda
• RE: slideshow sites/interfaces [was RE: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd)] Anne Pemberton
• regrets Matt May
• Re: examples of a variety of sites that include illustrations of concepts (i.e., examples of 3.4) Matt May
• Re: examples of a variety of sites that include illustrations of concepts (i.e., examples of 3.4) Anne Pemberton
• RE: feedback on "some things to play with" Steven Livingstone
• Re: examples of a variety of sites that include illustrations of concepts (i.e., examples of 3.4) Jo Miller
• RE: slideshow sites/interfaces [was RE: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd)] Steven Livingstone
• Re: examples of a variety of sites that include illustrations of concepts (i.e., examples of 3.4) Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Is this a Job for SVG and WAI? Jon Ferraiolo
• RE: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again Anne Pemberton
• probable regrets Jo Miller
• examples of a variety of sites that include illustrations of concepts (i.e., examples of 3.4) Wendy A Chisholm
• Re: Is this a Job for SVG and WAI? Jon Gunderson
• RE: More on 3.4 Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: slideshow sites/interfaces [was RE: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd)] Anne Pemberton
• RE: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: More on 3.4 Charles McCathieNevile
• 3.4 illustration page RE: NEW DRAFT - 31 July 2001 Charles McCathieNevile

Wednesday, 1 August 2001

• RE: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again Anne Pemberton

Thursday, 2 August 2001

• RE: NEW DRAFT - 31 July 2001 Gregg Vanderheiden
• RE: More on 3.4 Joel Sanda
• Re: More on 3.4 gregory j. rosmaita
• RE: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again Joel Sanda
• Re: Combining 1.1 and 3.4 Paul Bohman
• slideshow sites/interfaces [was RE: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd)] gregory j. rosmaita
• Re: Combining 1.1 and 3.4 Charles McCathieNevile
• definition Re: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: feedback on "some things to play with" Charles McCathieNevile

Wednesday, 1 August 2001

• Re: More on 3.4 Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again Emmanuelle Gutiérrez y Restrepo
• Re: Combining 1.1 and 3.4 Paul Bohman
• Re: dissenting opinion (was Re: RE: checkpoint 3.4 again) Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: More on 3.4 Matt May
• Combining 1.1 and 3.4 Paul Bohman
• feedback on "some things to play with" gregory j. rosmaita
• RE: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again Charles McCathieNevile
• RE: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again Charles McCathieNevile
• RE: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again Joel Sanda
• Re: dissenting opinion (was Re: RE: checkpoint 3.4 again) Anne Pemberton
• RE: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Anne Pemberton
• Re: Multimedia Charles McCathieNevile
• RE: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: More on 3.4 Charles McCathieNevile
• RE: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again Joel Sanda
• Regrets for Tomorrow................... Katie Haritos-Shea
• RE: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again Anne Pemberton
• RE: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again Joel Sanda
• Drafts with CSS to hide sections Wendy A Chisholm
• dissenting opinion (was Re: RE: checkpoint 3.4 again) gregory j. rosmaita
• Multimedia Steven Livingstone
• RE: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Steven Livingstone
• RE: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again Anne Pemberton
• RE: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again Joel Sanda
• Re: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again Jo Miller
• RE: NEW DRAFT - 31 July 2001 Anne Pemberton
• Re: More on 3.4 Wendy A Chisholm
• Re: NEW DRAFT - 31 July 2001 Anne Pemberton
• More Philosophy Stuff Kynn Bartlett
• Re: More on 3.4 Matt May
• Re: More on 3.4 Anne Pemberton
• Re: More on 3.4 Anne Pemberton
• Re: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Anne Pemberton
• RE: NEW DRAFT - 31 July 2001 Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Marja-Riitta Koivunen
• Additional comments on 31 July draft. Tim Noonan
• Agenda Jason White
• Suggestion for clearer wording of 2.1 in 31 July draft. Tim Noonan
• Issues arising from 31 July draft Jason White
• Re: Including content modes in 4.1 Charles McCathieNevile
• RE: NEW DRAFT - 31 July 2001 Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Including content modes in 4.1 Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Including content modes in 4.1 Joe Clark
• Re: More on 3.4 Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: Including content modes in 4.1 Kynn Bartlett
• Gutenberg at HWG Kynn Bartlett
• Re: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Proposal: checkpoint 3.4 Kynn Bartlett
• Re: More on 3.4 Matt May

Tuesday, 31 July 2001

• RE: NEW DRAFT - 31 July 2001 Anne Pemberton
• Re: NEW DRAFT - 31 July 2001 Paul Bohman
• Re: NEW DRAFT - 31 July 2001 Wendy A Chisholm
• RE: Java scripts Wendy A Chisholm
• RE: NEW DRAFT - 31 July 2001 Joel Sanda
• Re: Document structure Anne Pemberton
• Re: NEW DRAFT - 31 July 2001 Anne Pemberton
• RE: Java scripts Steven Livingstone
• Re: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again Anne Pemberton
• Re: Including content modes in 4.1 Joe Clark
• Re: Document structure Paul Bohman

Thursday, 2 August 2001

• Re: Java scripts seeman

Tuesday, 31 July 2001

• Re: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again gregory j. rosmaita
• RE: NEW DRAFT - 31 July 2001 Joel Sanda
• RE: Java scripts cyns@opendesign.com
• RE: Proposal: checkpoint 3.4 Ricardo Sánchez
• NEW DRAFT - 31 July 2001 Wendy A Chisholm

Thursday, 2 August 2001

• Java scripts seeman

Tuesday, 31 July 2001

• Re: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again Anne Pemberton
• Re: Proposal: checkpoint 3.4 Anne Pemberton
• Re: Proposal: checkpoint 3.4 Anne Pemberton
• Sentence about "uiniversal aspect" Paul Bohman
• Re: Including content modes in 4.1 Wendy A Chisholm
• Re: Document structure Paul Bohman
• Re: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Philosophy of WCAG (thanks Matt) Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Document structure Kynn Bartlett
• Document structure Paul Bohman
• Re: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again Anne Pemberton
• Re: Format for addressing grade-level content........ Anne Pemberton
• Re: Philosophy of WCAG (thanks Matt) Anne Pemberton
• Re: Proposal: checkpoint 3.4 Anne Pemberton
• Re: Sounds and checkpoint 11.1 gregory j. rosmaita
• Re: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again gregory j. rosmaita
• Re: Proposal: checkpoint 3.4 Wendy A Chisholm

Monday, 30 July 2001

• Re: Proposal: checkpoint 3.4 Kynn Bartlett
• Proposal: checkpoint 3.4 Joe Clark
• Re: Proposal: checkpoint 3.4 Wendy A Chisholm
• Re: Proposal: checkpoint 3.4 Kynn Bartlett
• Re: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Proposal deriving from checkpoint 2.1 Kynn Bartlett
• Proposal: checkpoint 3.4 Wendy A Chisholm
• RE: the Ruler - Rule question Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Format for addressing grade-level content........ Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Philosophy of WCAG (thanks Matt) Kynn Bartlett
• Re: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again Anne Pemberton
• Re: Proposal deriving from checkpoint 2.1 Anne Pemberton
• RE: the Ruler - Rule question Charles McCathieNevile
• RE: the Ruler - Rule question Gregg Vanderheiden
• Re: Format for addressing grade-level content........ Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: the Ruler - Rule question Anne Pemberton
• Re: Philosophy of WCAG (thanks Matt) Anne Pemberton
• Re: Format for addressing grade-level content........ Anne Pemberton
• Request to Join by way of Wendy A Chisholm
• Re: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Proposal deriving from checkpoint 2.1 Kynn Bartlett
• Re: the Ruler - Rule question Kynn Bartlett
• RE: the Ruler - Rule question Kynn Bartlett
• Philosophy of WCAG (thanks Matt) Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Checkpoint 3.4 again Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Format for addressing grade-level content........ Kynn Bartlett
• Re: List etiquette Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Format for addressing grade-level content........ Kynn Bartlett
• Re: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Anne Pemberton
• Re: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Marja-Riitta Koivunen
• Re: Checkpoint 3.4 again Anne Pemberton
• Philosophy Re: More on 3.4 Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: Checkpoint 3.4 again Anne Pemberton
• RE: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again Anne Pemberton
• Re: Checkpoint 3.4 again Charles McCathieNevile
• RE: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again Gregg Vanderheiden
• Re: Checkpoint 3.4 again Jason White
• Re: the Ruler - Rule question Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: International Accessibility Jason White
• Re: International Accessibility Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: Proposal deriving from checkpoint 2.1 Jason White
• International Accessibility s.livingstone@btinternet.com

Sunday, 29 July 2001

• Re: More on 3.4 Anne Pemberton
• Re: RE Checkpoint 3.4 again Anne Pemberton
• Re: the Ruler - Rule question Anne Pemberton
• Re: Format for addressing grade-level content........ Anne Pemberton
• More on 3.4 Matt May
• RE: the Ruler - Rule question Katie Haritos-Shea
• RE Checkpoint 3.4 again Gregg Vanderheiden
• the Ruler - Rule question Gregg Vanderheiden
• Re: Format for addressing grade-level content........ Al Gilman
• Re: Checkpoint 3.4 again Al Gilman
• Re: Proposal deriving from checkpoint 2.1 Anne Pemberton
• List etiquette Joe Clark
• Format for addressing grade-level content........ Katie Haritos-Shea
• Re: Proposal deriving from checkpoint 2.1 Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Checkpoint 3.4 again Anne Pemberton
• Re: Checkpoint 3.4 again Anne Pemberton
• Re: NEW DRAFT NEW DRAFT NEW DRAFT Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: Proposal deriving from checkpoint 2.1 Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: Sounds and checkpoint 11.1 Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Checkpoint 3.4 again Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Sounds and checkpoint 11.1 Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Checkpoint 3.4 again Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Checkpoint 3.4 again Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Checkpoint 3.4 again Kynn Bartlett
• New Member s.livingstone@btinternet.com
• Re: Checkpoint 3.4 again Charles McCathieNevile
• Sounds and checkpoint 11.1 Charles McCathieNevile
• Request to Join s.livingstone@btinternet.com
• Re: Checkpoint 3.4 again Anne Pemberton

Saturday, 28 July 2001

• Re: Checkpoint 3.4 again Sean B. Palmer
• Re: Checkpoint 3.4 again Marti McCuller
• Re: Checkpoint 3.4 again Anne Pemberton
• HTML minutes 26-07-2001 Teleconference (FINALLY) Katie Haritos-Shea
• Re: Checkpoint 3.4 again Joe Clark
• Re: Checkpoint 3.4 again Anne Pemberton
• Checkpoint 3.4 again Joe Clark
• Re: "Fixed" Print Versions (was: wichita state's usability resources) Anne Pemberton
• Re: wichita state's usability resources (Re: Aside on Fonts) Anne Pemberton
• Re: wichita state's usability resources (Re: Aside on Fonts) Kynn Bartlett
• Re: PDF Techniques and Adobe products Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: "Fixed" Print Versions (was: wichita state's usability resources) gregory j. rosmaita
• Re: wichita state's usability resources (Re: Aside on Fonts) gregory j. rosmaita
• "Fixed" Print Versions (was: wichita state's usability resources) Kynn Bartlett
• Re: wichita state's usability resources (Re: Aside on Fonts) gregory j. rosmaita

Friday, 27 July 2001

• Re: wichita state's usability resources (Re: Aside on Fonts) Kynn Bartlett
• wichita state's usability resources (Re: Aside on Fonts) gregory j. rosmaita
• Re: PDF Techniques and Adobe products Al Gilman
• Re: pdf and 508 Loretta Guarino Reid
• PDF Techniques and Adobe products Loretta Guarino Reid
• Re: pdf and 508 Loretta Guarino Reid

Thursday, 26 July 2001

• Re: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Anne Pemberton

Friday, 27 July 2001

• FW: Winners of ICAES 2001 International Access Engineering Awards Announced & WAVE Katie Haritos-Shea

Thursday, 26 July 2001

• Aside on Fonts: was: RE: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Anne Pemberton

Friday, 27 July 2001

• Re: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Jonathan Chetwynd
• Re: Philosophy of WCAG Re: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Kynn Bartlett
• RE: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) gregory j. rosmaita
• Re: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) gregory j. rosmaita
• Re: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) gregory j. rosmaita
• Philosophy of WCAG Re: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) gregory j. rosmaita
• Re: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) gregory j. rosmaita
• Re: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Matt May
• Re: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering Phil Brown
• Re: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Kynn Bartlett
• RE: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Charles McCathieNevile

Wednesday, 25 July 2001

• RE: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Anne Pemberton

Friday, 27 July 2001

• Proposal deriving from checkpoint 2.1 Jason White

Thursday, 26 July 2001

• Re: References and contact (was: RE: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd)) Jason White
• Re: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Jason White
• Re: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Kynn Bartlett
• Re: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Matt May
• RE: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Kynn Bartlett
• RE: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Kynn Bartlett
• RE: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Kynn Bartlett
• RE: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Jo Miller
• RE: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) gregory j. rosmaita
• References and contact (was: RE: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd)) Wendy A Chisholm

Wednesday, 25 July 2001

• RE: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Anne Pemberton
• Re: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Anne Pemberton

Thursday, 26 July 2001

• RE: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) gregory j. rosmaita
• RE: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Joel Sanda
• Re: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Matt May

Wednesday, 25 July 2001

• Re: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Anne Pemberton
• Re: NEW DRAFT NEW DRAFT NEW DRAFT Anne Pemberton

Thursday, 26 July 2001

• NEW DRAFT NEW DRAFT NEW DRAFT Wendy A Chisholm

Wednesday, 25 July 2001

• Re: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Adam Victor Reed
• RE: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Gregg Vanderheiden
• RE: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Gregg Vanderheiden
• RE: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Al Gilman

Tuesday, 24 July 2001

• RE: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Anne Pemberton

Wednesday, 25 July 2001

• RE: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Alan J. Flavell
• RE: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Charles McCathieNevile
• RE: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Gregg Vanderheiden
• Agenda Jason White

Tuesday, 24 July 2001

• RE: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) gregory j. rosmaita
• RE: guideline 7.1 about screen flickering (fwd) Charles McCathieNevile
• Action Paul: adding a sentence to the intro Wendy A Chisholm

Monday, 23 July 2001

• regrets for thursday's call cyns@opendesign.com
• Re: fun: photos and participants Wendy A Chisholm
• Re: fun: photos and participants Kynn Bartlett
• Re: fun: photos and participants Kynn Bartlett
• Re: Including content modes in 4.1 Adam Victor Reed
• Re: fun: photos and participants gregory j. rosmaita

Sunday, 22 July 2001

• Re: [CSS-TECHS] system colors Kynn Bartlett
• RE: !important Tantek Celik

Saturday, 21 July 2001

• style reflects affinity grouping beyond what's in an element type Al Gilman

Friday, 20 July 2001

• RE: photos and participants Anne Pemberton

Saturday, 21 July 2001

• Re: photos and participants Jonathan Chetwynd

Friday, 20 July 2001

• Re: photos and participants Jonathan Chetwynd

Thursday, 19 July 2001

• RE: photos and participants Anne Pemberton

Friday, 20 July 2001

• fun: photos and participants Wendy A Chisholm

Thursday, 19 July 2001

• 19 July 2001 - WCAG WG Telecon Wendy A Chisholm
• IRC reminder - on during today's telecon Wendy A Chisholm
• Re: minutes from 20 june 2001 GL f2f gregory j. rosmaita
• RE: regrets cyns@opendesign.com
• regrets Matt May
• multimedia breakout notes (20 june 2001/GL f2f) gregory j. rosmaita
• raw minutes: final afternoon session of GL f2f, 21 june 2001 gregory j. rosmaita
• minutes from 20 june 2001 GL f2f gregory j. rosmaita
• Re: Including content modes in 4.1 Wendy A Chisholm
• RE: [CSS-TECHS] goals and audience of this document Joel Sanda
• [CSS-TECHS] goals and audience of this document Wendy A Chisholm
• Re: [CSS-TECHS] Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: Including content modes in 4.1 Al Gilman
• Re: Including content modes in 4.1 Wendy A Chisholm

Wednesday, 18 July 2001

• RE: [CSS-TECHS] Jo Miller
• Re: [CSS-TECHS] Jo Miller
• RE: [CSS-TECHS] Joel Sanda
• [CSS-TECHS] system colors Wendy A Chisholm
• RE: [CSS-TECHS] Wendy A Chisholm
• Re: New CSS Techniques draft Kynn Bartlett
• RE: [CSS-TECHS] Joel Sanda
• [CSS-TECHS] Wendy A Chisholm
• Re: Who would be able to attend a F2F in Melbourne William Loughborough
• William's Semantic Web Primer Katie Haritos-Shea
• Regrets and Action Item Katie Haritos-Shea
• Re: New CSS Techniques draft Jo Miller
• Re: Who would be able to attend a F2F in Melbourne Joe Clark
• UAAG's content-type, output modality, & selection labels gregory j. rosmaita
• Reminder of action items from last few meetings Wendy A Chisholm
• Timeline: July through November Wendy A Chisholm
• Re: Agenda Charles McCathieNevile
• Agenda Jason White
• Re: Who would be able to attend a F2F in Melbourne, Australia - 12-15 November 2001? Jason White

Tuesday, 17 July 2001

• New CSS Techniques draft Wendy A Chisholm
• RE: !important Joel Sanda
• RE: !important Wendy A Chisholm
• RE: !important Joel Sanda
• Re: !important Jon Gunderson
• F2F meeting in Melbourne Katie Haritos-Shea
• Re: Who would be able to attend a F2F in Melbourne, Australia - 12-15 November 2001? Charles McCathieNevile
• Who would be able to attend a F2F in Melbourne, Australia - 12-15 November 2001? Wendy A Chisholm

Monday, 16 July 2001

• !important Wendy A Chisholm
• Re: an action item :) Emmanuelle Gutiérrez y Restrepo

Sunday, 15 July 2001

• RE: an action item :) Anne Pemberton

Monday, 16 July 2001

• Re: an action item :) Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: an action item :) Emmanuelle Gutiérrez y Restrepo

Sunday, 15 July 2001

• RE: an action item :) Anne Pemberton

Monday, 16 July 2001

• Re: an action item :) Emmanuelle Gutiérrez y Restrepo

Sunday, 15 July 2001

• RE: an action item :) Anne Pemberton

Monday, 16 July 2001

• Re: an action item :) Emmanuelle Gutiérrez y Restrepo
• Re: an action item :) Lisa Seeman

Sunday, 15 July 2001

• RE: Comments on SUFFICIENCY for tomorrows COnf Call Charles McCathieNevile

Friday, 13 July 2001

• Request to join Jo Miller
• Re: an action item :) Emmanuelle Gutiérrez y Restrepo
• Re: HTML Minutes for Today July 12, 2001 Wendy A Chisholm
• HTML Minutes for Today July 12, 2001 Katie Haritos-Shea
• RE: an action item :) cyns@opendesign.com

Thursday, 12 July 2001

• RE: Comments on SUFFICIENCY for tomorrows COnf Call Anne Pemberton
• IRC Wendy A Chisholm
• RE: Comments on SUFFICIENCY for tomorrows COnf Call Wendy A Chisholm
• regrets for today's call cyns@opendesign.com
• an action item :) Lisa Seeman
• Re: request to join Lisa Seeman
• RE: Comments on SUFFICIENCY for tomorrows COnf Call Anne Pemberton
• RE: Comments on SUFFICIENCY for tomorrows COnf Call Gregg Vanderheiden
• Re: Comments on SUFFICIENCY for tomorrows COnf Call Jason White
• Comments on SUFFICIENCY for tomorrows COnf Call Gregg Vanderheiden

Wednesday, 11 July 2001

• Comments on SUFFICIENCY for tomorrows COnf Call Gregg Vanderheiden
• Fw: Sufficiency/checkpoint satisfaction criteria (repost of last week's draft) Lisa Seeman
• Re: request to join Lisa Seeman
• Re: Agenda Charles McCathieNevile
• Agenda Jason White

Monday, 9 July 2001

• Re: Sufficiency/checkpoint satisfaction criteria (repost of last week's draft) Anne Pemberton

Tuesday, 10 July 2001

• Sufficiency/checkpoint satisfaction criteria (repost of last week's draft) Jason White

Monday, 9 July 2001

• Re: request to join Marc David Johnson
• request to join ckrupitzer
• "Request to Join" aastik
• Request to Join Daniel Newman

Friday, 6 July 2001

• HTML Minutes for July 5, 2001 Katie Haritos-Shea

Thursday, 5 July 2001

• Re: DTD for techniques documents Charles McCathieNevile
• Minutes for July 5, 2001 conference call Paul Bohman
• Re: "Auditory" descriptions Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: "Auditory" descriptions Joe Clark
• Re: DTD for techniques documents Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: DTD for techniques documents Matt May
• Re: DTD for techniques documents Matt May
• Re: DTD for techniques documents Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: "Auditory" descriptions Kynn Bartlett
• Re: DTD for techniques documents Charles McCathieNevile
• RE: Proposal: sufficiency criteria for WCAG 2.0 Gregg Vanderheiden
• Re: "Auditory" descriptions Charles McCathieNevile
• "Auditory" descriptions Joe Clark

Wednesday, 4 July 2001

• Re: DTD for techniques documents Chris Ridpath
• Re: DTD for techniques documents Sean B. Palmer
• William Retiring Anne Pemberton
• Re: DTD for techniques documents Sean B. Palmer
• Re: Agenda William Loughborough
• Re: Proposal: sufficiency criteria for WCAG 2.0 William Loughborough
• Re: DTD for techniques documents Masayasu Ishikawa
• Additional agenda item Jason White
• Agenda Jason White
• regrets for Thursday's telecon Wendy A Chisholm
• Notes and relevant threads to the baseline capabilities/user agents clause discussion Wendy A Chisholm

Tuesday, 3 July 2001

• Proposal: sufficiency criteria for WCAG 2.0 Jason White
• DTD for techniques documents Matt May
• Guideline 10.5 and Table Cells (fwd) Charles McCathieNevile
• Re: photos of the meeting Chris Ridpath

Monday, 2 July 2001

• Re: Semantic pragmatic Charles McCathieNevile

Last message date: Sunday, 30 September 2001 23:30:46 UTC