W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2005

Re: Graceful degradation (was: Re: Issues summary, GL 4.2)

From: Jason White <jasonw@ariel.its.unimelb.edu.au>
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 12:56:15 +1000 (EST)
To: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0504281253230.9143@ariel.its.unimelb.edu.au>

On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 lguarino@adobe.com wrote:

> > Graceful degradation is a term already in wide use in Web standards.
> It is
> > not something we should attempt to redefine.

Is there a widely accepted definition in any of the standards that uses
the term?

> >
> It may be widely used in Web standards, but one of the 4.2 issues was
> a request for us to explain what we meant by it! And what we are
> requiring appears to be a bit stronger; it says that the functionality
> should not degrade if only the baseline technologies are available.
If this differs from the customary meaning of "graceful degradation" then
I suggest avoiding the term altogether. On the other hand, if there isn't
a widely accepted definition then there would appear to be no harm in
defining and using it as proposed.
Received on Thursday, 28 April 2005 02:56:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 21:07:39 UTC