- From: Roberto Scano - IWA/HWG <rscano@iwa-italy.org>
- Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2002 21:01:40 +0200
- To: <gian@stanleymilford.com.au>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Hi, i think option 2 is more "clear" but tecnically i think is best to use option 1. Also, about my IRC message in the last meeting: http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2002/08/29-minutes.html "I suggest for "conformity" of the document to use in Appendix B the same style of paragraph of level 2 and three, starting level one with "At level 1,..." have the group considered this change? ----- Original Message ----- From: <gian@stanleymilford.com.au> To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org> Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 2:56 AM Subject: Action item - claiming conformance at Level 2 or 3 Hi, If you could respond to the list as to which one you like the most - that way we can see if there's a definate favourite and finalise it next teleconference. The original wording: A conformance claim associated with the content asserts conformance to this checkpoint at level 2 or level 3. Option 1: A conformance claim associated with the content asserts conformance to this checkpoint at the relevant level (level 2 or level 3). Option 2: Conformance to this checkpoint is asserted. The conformance claim specifies at which level the site conforms to this checkpoint (level 2 or level 3). Option 3: The site asserts conformance to this checkpoint and specifies the level claimed (level 2 or level 3). Cheers, Gian Gian Sampson-Wild Accessibility Specialist Member: Web Content Accessibility Group Working Group W3C Web Accessibility Initiative Stanley & Milford A Software Communication Group Company Level 16 644 Chapel Street South Yarra VIC 3141 Australia Tel. 613 9826 5829 Fax. 613 9826 8336 Mob. 0404 498 030 Email gian@stanleymilford.com.au Web: www.stanleymilford.com.au ******************************************** This message contains privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the addressee named above. If you are not the intended recipient of this message you must not disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it. If you have received this message in error, please notify Software Communication Group immediately. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Software Communication Group. ********************************************
Received on Sunday, 1 September 2002 15:01:54 UTC