- From: Tim Boland <frederick.boland@nist.gov>
- Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2006 10:16:27 -0500
- To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
- Message-Id: <5.1.1.5.2.20060222101105.01cde878@mailserver.nist.gov>
The proposed definition seems somewhat "circular" to me - "perceivable" defined in terms of "perceived" Maybe change proposed definition to: "relationships in the content that are (objectively?) noticeable (through the user's senses) from the default presentation"? Thanks and best wishes Tim Boland NIST At 02:28 AM 2/22/2006 -0600, you wrote: >This definition seems backward. > > > >perceivable structures > > > >relationships in the content that are necessary to perceive the >organization of the content. > > > > > >I think it needs to be > > > > > >perceivable structures > > > >relationships in the content that can be perceived from the default >presentation. > > > > > > > >RATIONALE > > > >What we are trying to achieve is to make sure that any relationships that >are obvious from the presentation are also obvious when looking at the >markup. > > > >Yes? > > > > > > >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/>http://trace.wisc.edu/> FAX 608/262-8848 >For a list of our list discussions ><http://trace.wisc.edu/lists/>http://trace.wisc.edu/lists/ > >The Player for my DSS sound file is at ><http://tinyurl.com/dho6b>http://tinyurl.com/dho6b > ><http://trace.wisc.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/> > > > >
Received on Wednesday, 22 February 2006 15:17:05 UTC