- From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
- Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 11:34:37 -0500
- To: "'Gez Lemon'" <gez.lemon@gmail.com>
- Cc: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
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