- From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
- Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2004 21:47:44 -0500
- To: "'Joe Clark'" <joeclark@joeclark.org>, "'WAI-GL'" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Actually the results from the working group meeting where we discussed this were For two levels (with third level dropped) 7 - Prefer 7 - Ok,can live with 6 - Cannot live with 0 - Don't know For two levels (with three levels collapsed to 2) 0 - Prefer 14 - Ok,can live with 6 - Cannot live with 0 - Don't know For Three levels. 13 - Prefer 4 - Ok,can live with 0 - Cannot live with 3 - Not sure Since consensus is defined as "I prefer this or at least can live with it" we take consensus votes in that fashion So we are continuing with 3 levels for now. 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 Joe Clark Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 10:38 AM To: WAI-GL Subject: Re: Agenda April 15th > 2 - Definition of Levels? > a) - what are the goals of the different levels (the general > explanation) > ?? L1 - Things the author must do so that something can be made > accessible > ?? L2 - Things the author can do to make content accessible > ?? L3 - Things author can do that are not generally applicable or are > very hard You don't have anything resembling "consensus" for using three levels rather than two, though that is what Gregg himself favours. Some people interpret "Gregg likes it" to mean "everybody agrees" and "it's the best idea." As has been mentioned several times on this list and in the teleconferences, it is hard to justify more than two levels of compliance. <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2003OctDec/0285.html> -- Joe Clark | joeclark@joeclark.org Accessibility <http://joeclark.org/access/> Expect criticism if you top-post
Received on Wednesday, 14 April 2004 22:49:02 UTC