RE: Baselines: how specific?

I think we will explore these topics more during implementation.  A lot of
this is clearer (the issues and solutions -- and the issues with the
solutions) when we are actually using them.

Gregg

 -- ------------------------------ 
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. 
Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
Director - Trace R & D Center 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 
The Player for my DSS sound file is at http://tinyurl.com/dho6b 

-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of Gez Lemon
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2006 10:39 AM
To: Gregg Vanderheiden
Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: Re: Baselines: how specific?


Hi Gregg,

On 20/04/06, Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu> wrote:
<quote>
Ok how about.

1) A technology or feature isn't in the baseline unless it is named in the
baseline.

2) Baseline 'items' can include technologies, specific features, or well
defined collections.
        - E.g. "embed" could be listed in a baseline definition as a
      separate item but would not be in baseline that listed HTML 4.01
      unless it was listed separately since it is not part of HTML 4.01.

3) If a collection or general technology is specified in the baseline, the
assumption is that all of its subparts, features, modules etc. are in the
baseline unless excluded in the baseline definition.
</quote>

That works for me. What about items that aren't part of a public
specification that are "relied upon"? Do we intent to make rules about them,
or is that the responsibility of the authority setting the baseline? It's
not a problem for this particular example, as embed is very well supported.

Best regards,

Gez

--
_____________________________
Supplement your vitamins
http://juicystudio.com

Received on Thursday, 20 April 2006 16:34:55 UTC