Re: Should WCAG explicitly talk about *mainstream* assistive technologies?

On 15/07/2016 15:10, White, Jason J wrote:
> */[Jason] This is a fundamentally important observation. The type of
> assistive technology under consideration could be regarded as satisfying
> the following requirements./*
>
> */1.      /*It is available to the public (whether for free or on a
> commercial basis).
>
> */2.      /*It supports relevant standards so that the content author
> need not specifically support it with measures not required by other
> standards-conformant AT.
>
> Such definitions are much more valuable and specific than words such as
> “mainstream”.

Agree, was probably trying to get away with proposing a minimally 
invasive, but too wooly, tweak to the definition. I'm all for more clarity!

P
-- 
Patrick H. Lauke

www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com
twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke

Received on Friday, 15 July 2016 14:13:39 UTC