RE: URI references - in conformance

From: Ben Caldwell <caldwell@trace.wisc.edu> · Date: Thu, 4 Nov 2004 14:47:21 -0600

Does a claim for www.example.com/documents/ imply that any URI that includes this intial string would be accessible? 

For example, www.example.com/documnets/document1.html may be a unit authors could claim is accessible, while an image that is a subset of that unit (ex. www.example.com/documents/pics/pic1.gif) wouldn't be included.

Seems like what we need is a way for authors to specify an appropriate level of granularity for claims meant to cover multiple URIs.

-Ben

-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of lguarino@adobe.com
Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2004 2:28 PM
To: Gregg Vanderheiden
Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: Re: URI references - in conformance

I think this would make it much more likely that owners of large web sites would post a claim. So I think it is a good thing. But will it make it harder for a user to determine the status of a particular URI within that tree?

Loretta

----- Original Message -----
From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Thursday, November 4, 2004 12:01 pm
Subject: URI references - in conformance

> Should we consider allowing people to claim conformance  by URI root
> 
> 
> 
> For example 
> 
> 
> 
> All content at  Trace.wisc.edu/public/    meets   xxxx
> 
> 
> 
> Or 
> 
> All content at Trace.wisc.edu except  trace.wisc.edu/deeparchive/  
> meets
> yyyy
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Thoughts? 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Gregg
> 
> ------------------------
> 
> Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
> Professor - Depts of Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
> Director - Trace R & D Center 
> University of Wisconsin-Madison 
> < <http://trace.wisc.edu/> http://trace.wisc.edu/> FAX 608/262-
> 8848  
> For a list of our list discussions http://trace.wisc.edu/lists/
> 
> <http://trace.wisc.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 