- From: Cynthia Shelly <cyns@microsoft.com>
- Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2002 11:09:46 -0800
- To: "Kynn Bartlett" <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>, "Lisa Seeman" <seeman@netvision.net.il>, "GLWAI Guidelines WG (GL - WAI Guidelines WG)" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Exactly. Thank you, Kynn. You've done a good chunk of my action item for me <grin/> -----Original Message----- From: Kynn Bartlett [mailto:kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com] Sent: Friday, February 22, 2002 9:02 AM To: Lisa Seeman; 'GLWAI Guidelines WG (GL - WAI Guidelines WG)' Subject: Re: Conclusions from Discussion today At 11:27 PM -0800 2/21/02, Lisa Seeman wrote: >Hmm, > We are talking about this on the phone but I am sending this point to the >list anyway > >We seem to have lost conform to W3 technologies or at least to widely >published, publicly available and used specifications. >If you develop for an obscure technology that is not supported by assistive >technology that the whole WCAG becomes ridicules. What we want to say is: (a) use technologies (or combinations of technologies) which are designed to be accessible -- a category which includes W3C specifications among others (b) use technologies which you can reasonably expect to be supported -- which means, for example, sending raw XML and XSLT converting to SVG and CSS will likely be unhelpful, even though those are W3C technologies --Kynn -- Kynn Bartlett <kynn@idyllmtn.com> http://kynn.com Chief Technologist, Idyll Mountain http://idyllmtn.com Web Accessibility Expert-for-hire http://kynn.com/resume Next Book: Teach Yourself CSS in 24 http://cssin24hours.com
Received on Friday, 22 February 2002 14:16:20 UTC