- From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
- Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2004 16:11:27 -0600
- To: 'David MacDonald' <befree@magma.ca>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org, 'Wendy A Chisholm' <wendy@w3.org>
- Message-id: <0HSX002XJXN4F0@smtp4.doit.wisc.edu>
Thanks much for this David. Very nice information and summary. Gregg -- ------------------------------ Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr. Director - Trace R & D Center University of Wisconsin-Madison _____ From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of David MacDonald Sent: Wednesday, February 11, 2004 12:41 PM To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org; 'Wendy A Chisholm' Subject: [TECH] CSS techniques mapping the 1.0 Techniques to the 2.0 Techniques I had the action item to map the 1.0 techniques to 2.0 techniques to find places where they conflict or where there may be omissions. Here's a basic mapping of the CSS Techs 1.0 to 2.0 and vice versa Differences: * 2.0 does not talk about overriding the style sheet as per 1.0 CSS #2 * 2.0 does not talk about spacers about spacers as per 1.0 #11.1 * 2.0 does not talk about hide/show movement as per 1.0 #14 * 2.0 introduces some talk of XML in #1 (author benefits * Neither of the documents have opened up "scripting and stylesheets" (2.0#4.4) * 1.0 does not talk about "null" alt text as per 2.0#4. * 1.0 does not talk about text equivalents for content generated by style sheets as per 2.0#3.1 I think given that they are almost identical in content (the lay out is different) we can migrate the CSS Techniques 1.0 into the 2.0 document and use it as the supporting TECH spec for both the current 1.0 WCAG guidelines and the emerging 2.0 Guidelines. Cheers David MacDonald e-ramp Inc. www.eramp.com <http://www.eramp.com/>
Received on Wednesday, 11 February 2004 17:11:41 UTC