- From: by way of Wendy A Chisholm <kynnbartlett@yahoo.com>
- Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2003 18:22:50 -0400
- To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Agreed. The word "avoid" has been one of the worst stumbling blocks for Web developers -- after "until user agents" -- in understanding and implementing the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines. Nobody seems to know what "avoid" means. If WCAG is meant to forbid something, it should do so. If it does not mean to forbid something then how can you know if you have complied? (If "avoid" does not mean "do not use," then any "avoid" checkbox is by definition uncheckable.) The word "avoid" is one word that -- in the opinion of this Web development educator -- should be excised from WCAG entirely. It tells us nothing and guides no one. --Kynn --- "Montgomery, Gordon" <Gordon.Montgomery@Staples.com> wrote: > > The issue seems to be semantic, pivoting around the > meaning of the word > "avoid" in the guideline. > > I agree with Pam that "avoid" does not include the > sense of its likely > intended meaning: "do not use" [per Wendy 's > interpretation]. "Avoid" > certainly is more of a "grey" word > than a "black or white" one. > > I suggest need to be clearer and replace "avoid" > with "do not use" in the > guidelines. > > This change would then create a more "black and > white" decision for those > trying to make their whole sites compliant. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com
Received on Wednesday, 4 June 2003 18:23:01 UTC