- From: Kerstin Goldsmith <kerstin.goldsmith@oracle.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 13:35:37 -0800
- To: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
- CC: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Received on Thursday, 17 November 2005 21:35:55 UTC
This looks fine to me -- it's a lot clearer as edited. -kerstin Gregg Vanderheiden wrote: > > > The following appears to be editorial (wording) but it is to a success > criterion so I am posting to the list > > > > > > WAS > > Non-emergency interruptions, such as updated content, can be postponed > or suppressed by the user. > > > > non-emergency interruption : an interruption that is not a sudden, > unexpected situation or occurrence that requires immediate action to > preserve health, safety or property > > > > > > NEW PROPOSED (From F2F but no recorded resolution) > > <proposed>The user can postpone or suppress all interruptions, except > those involving emergencies.</proposed> > > > > rationale: gets us out of using "non-emergency" in SC so we can define > "emergency" instead > > > > > > > > > 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/>_ FAX 608/262-8848 > For a list of our list discussions http://trace.wisc.edu/lists/ > > <http://trace.wisc.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/> > > > > >
Received on Thursday, 17 November 2005 21:35:55 UTC