RE: [#285] Proposal: Rename Core Techniques as Cross-Technology Techniques

I think that cross-technology is better because they will show up on all the
technology specific checklists -- and this suggests that.

Also, it is not clear that general guidelines have to be used with something
else.

 
Gregg

 -- ------------------------------ 
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 


-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of Charles McCathieNevile
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 4:28 PM
To: Ben Caldwell
Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: RE: [#285] Proposal: Rename Core Techniques as Cross-Technology
Techniques
Importance: High


I prefer that someone else decide between these two.

cheers

Chaals

On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, Ben Caldwell wrote:

>
>Issue #285 [1] was discussed at this afternoon's call. We resolved that the
>name should be changed, but have not settled on what that name should be.
>
>Candidates include:
>
>1.) Cross-Technology Techniques
>2.) General Techniques
>
>Please indicate your preference.
>
>-Ben
>
>[1] http://trace.wisc.edu/bugzilla_wcag/show_bug.cgi?id=285
>
>
>

-- 
Charles McCathieNevile  http://www.w3.org/People/Charles  tel: +61 409 134
136
SWAD-E http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/Europe         fax(france): +33 4 92 38 78
22
 Post:   21 Mitchell street, FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia    or
 W3C, 2004 Route des Lucioles, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France

Received on Friday, 20 June 2003 10:10:59 UTC