( re: discussion on 5.2 and 5.3 - Choose good technologies ) my two cents: I do not see any more what it is we are trying to promote. I thought we needed people to use technologies that are widely available and cross platform, that you are not just providing text equivalents ect, in some scenarios but to a critical mass of scenarios. In other words- open, and useful. If we do not want to say use W3C technologies, but use what the w3c stand for, again - open and useful. is that essence still being preserved, or our we getting to complicated? (There is an overlap with UAAG and maybe we should just reference that. ) even the old version seemed to verbose, why must a technology (at level one) make use of operating system accessibility features ? surely that is against scenario independent, were we do not know the operating system. All the best, Lisa Seeman UnBounded Access Widen the World Web lisa@ubaccess.com www.ubaccess.com Tel: +972 (2) 675-1233 Fax: +972 (2) 675-1195 -----Original Message----- From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Ben Caldwell Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 2:37 AM To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org Subject: Today's Minutes http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2003/02/06-minutes.html Thanks Loretta! -- Ben Caldwell | caldwell@trace.wisc.edu Trace Research and Development Center (http://trace.wisc.edu)Received on Sunday, 9 February 2003 13:30:59 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 21:07:29 UTC