- 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>
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