- From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
- Date: Thu, 3 May 2007 23:36:02 -0500
- To: "'David MacDonald'" <befree@magma.ca>, <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <002c01c78e05$b8d2c570$136fa8c0@NC84301>
Hmmm Do we need to include " control the audio volume (including 0) which is ... " ? Kind of awkward but. I think maybe we don't need to because I've never seen anything that claimed to have volume control that you can't set to zero. I'm sure there is one but I THINK we could just put this in HTM. Other people's thoughts? Gregg -- ------------------------------ Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D. _____ From: w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-gl-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of David MacDonald Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2007 5:46 PM To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org Subject: Audio background amendment A follow up to one of my comments on the Survey that was tabled. http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/SimplifiedIntroAndConformance/results#xi ntroedi I think the language of 1.4.2 needs an adjustment. Or it needs to be fixed in the intent. <current SC 1.4.2>or a mechanism is available to control audio volume which ...</current SC 1.4.2> An example. Some authors might say the user has "control" if they can only adjust the volume a bit... which would defeat the purpose of the SC and let them have distracting background. Let's add to the Intent... "Control means that the volume can be reduced to zero DB" David MacDonald ...access empowers people... ...barriers disable them... www.eramp.com
Received on Friday, 4 May 2007 04:36:17 UTC