- From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
- Date: Sun, 7 Oct 2001 23:40:24 -0500
- To: "GLWAI Guidelines WG \(GL - WAI Guidelines WG\)" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Thanks Cynthia, You saved me a call for specifics on this. Do you (or anyone) see any specific impact on our guidelines? Is there a principle we should consider for consensus? Gregg -- ------------------------------ Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. Professor - Human Factors Dept of Ind. Engr. - U of Wis. Director - Trace R & D Center Gv@trace.wisc.edu <mailto:Gv@trace.wisc.edu>, <http://trace.wisc.edu/> FAX 608/262-8848 For a list of our listserves send “lists” to listproc@trace.wisc.edu <mailto:listproc@trace.wisc.edu> -----Original Message----- From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Cynthia Shelly Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2001 7:28 PM To: Web Content Guidelines Subject: RE: Agenda On the Author and user needs conflict issue... When we originally discussed it, the example was distracting advertising. The author is intentionally changing the user's focus from what the user considers to be the primary content (the news article) to what the author considers to be the primary content (the ad). From the author's viewpoint, he has made his primary content (the ad) *MORE* accessible with by adding dancing hamsters (or whatever). This is a real need for the author. If he is not successful at this, he won't get as many advertisers, or his advertisers won't pay as much, and he'll go out of business, taking his secondary content (the news article) with him. The user probably won't see it this way, and will find that he has been distracted from the primary content (the news article) by the secondary content (the ad).
Received on Monday, 8 October 2001 00:40:54 UTC