RE: Resolutions on Changes to REQUIREMENTS DOC

On Fri, 1 Feb 2002, Wendy A Chisholm wrote:

  At 05:36 AM 2/1/02, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
  >I don't think I am satisfied with that. I think it is an explicit requirement
  >that a user who is on one version can, by an accessible means, get to a
  >version that suits them.

  yes, we stated that - "according to user preferences"

I don't think this clearly enough states the point I am trying to make - that
there is a real issue in where the user states their preferences (via the
browser configuration, or directly during browsing).

  >I am not sure that this requirement expresses that - "easily" doesn't really
  >say enough about whether that requires the user to reconfigure their browser
  >propoerly (users should, but I don't think we can rely on it in the next two
  >years) or whether they should be able to do it from the content...

  we don't want to assume how it will be done.  this will be covered in
  techniques.  all we want to state right now -- in the requirements
  document for WCAG 2.0 -- is that in WCAG 2.0 we believe server-side magic
  to help users easily find something that meets their preferences is a
  good thing.

I would like us to make an assumption in this case. If I am the only one, I
think the best thing to do is note that as an issue / dissent / whatever, and
publish.

cheers

Charles

  >So for the moment I disagree.

  please propose rewording or I think we will move forward with publishing
  this working draft, considering that we had consensus with those who were
  on the call yesterday.

  --wendy

Received on Friday, 1 February 2002 10:01:27 UTC