RE: Definition of baseline

We had written an introduction to baseline document and it was posted at

http://w3.org/WAI/intro/wcag20-baseline.php

This was linked from within the introduction section of the WCAG 2.0 Jan 17
draft.
However this appears to be a dead link now. Does anyone know where it went?

David MacDonald
www.eramp.com 


-----Original Message-----
From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of Christophe Strobbe
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 2:12 AM
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: RE: Definition of baseline



At 08:57 22/02/2006, Kerstin Goldsmith wrote:
<blockquote>
What are we thinking a baseline will actually look like in written 
form?  In other words, do we have examples to add to the definition/s 
below?  I think that with examples we will be able to see if the proposed 
definition works, or needs work.
</blockquote>

At 10:25 22/02/2006, Gregg Vanderheiden responded:
<blockquote>
It would be a list of technologies
We have a doc on it somewhere.  Have to look for it.
</blockquote>

The first version is at 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005OctDec/att-0493/baseline_
overview_draft.htm.
An edited version is at 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2005OctDec/att-0507/baseline_
overview_draft_editsCS.html.
It was discussed in the 17 November telecon: 
http://www.w3.org/2005/11/17-wai-wcag-minutes.html#item01.

I imagine that some people would be interested in a machine-readable 
baseline definition, for example in RDF.

I also wonder if just listing technologies is a bit too simplistic: it 
assumes that all features of a technology are supported, including, for 
example, in the case of HTML 4.01, the object element, the optgroup 
element, the link element for navigation, and the longdesc attribute. 
(Since support has been getting better these are not the best examples, but 
SVG support has similar issues.) What if authors use embed instead of 
object? This can happen when the customer sets the baseline (see note 4 in 
Gregg's proposed definition) and wants embed instead of object.
If someone (customer and/or developer) decides that certain a repair 
technique will be used because the preferred markup feature (that would 
fulfill the same purpose) is not sufficiently supported, should it be 
possible to exlude that markup feature from the baseline? If yes, that 
would provide a mechanism to explain the presence of the repair technique.

Regards,

Christophe


-- 
Christophe Strobbe
K.U.Leuven - Departement of Electrical Engineering - Research Group on 
Document Architectures
Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 - 3001 Leuven-Heverlee - BELGIUM
tel: +32 16 32 85 51
http://www.docarch.be/ 


Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be/cwis/email_disclaimer.htm

Received on Wednesday, 22 February 2006 14:56:34 UTC