- 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