- From: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
- Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 18:44:50 -0800
- To: jasonw@ariel.ucs.unimelb.edu.au, Web Content Guidelines <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
At 11:31 AM +1100 11/25/01, Jason White wrote: >Thus, taking checkpoint 3.3 as an example, we should first reach >agreement on clear, testable success criteria and techniques which we >have good grounds for concluding (on the basis of relevant research) >are of real and substantial benefit to people. Charles and Lisa have >made a start in this direction. > >Only after we know what the relevant techniques are, should we >consider what it would be practical or reasonable to require of all >web sites, and how checkpoint 3.3 best fits into whatever conformance >scheme is devised for the guidelines I also think this needs to apply to our own demands for self- conformance as well. In other words, I think it's premature for members of the group to demand "dogfood" at this time, and I think it would DEFINITELY be a shame if people are demanding "dogfood" as a way of say, when it's not readibly provided, "aha, then the requirement to illustrate is bogus." --Kynn -- Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com> http://www.kynn.com/
Received on Saturday, 24 November 2001 22:03:00 UTC