W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 1999

RE: simple & understandable

From: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 1999 13:46:52 -0400
Message-Id: <199906191741.NAA06543@relay.interim.iamworld.net>
To: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
I don't know how many people noticed or missed Wendy's invitation for
people to join the content guidelines working group in an in-depth review
of this area.


While it is not immediately clear what should be done in this area, there
is plausible evidence that more could be done.  It's a good idea to take a
closer look at what that might be.  Please extend to the working group a
little suspension of judgement on where to draw the line or build any walls
until they have a time to dig a little deeper around the roots of these


At 05:40 PM 6/18/99 -0400, Chuck Hitchcock wrote:
>>Wayne Meyers wrote: I don't agree. I want to dismiss the problem.
>>WM also wrote: Conflating accessibility issues with understandability issues
>could prove horribly counter-productive and could diminish the potential
>impact of the
>WAI campaign to improve the quality of markup out there.
>CH:  I sure don't want to dismiss the problem but feel that a wall needs
to be
>put up between the
>1. "universal design for learning issues"
>2. "understanding meaning issues"
>3. "the organization of content issues"
>and the existing page content author guidelines.
>In general, I agree with your thoughts on this in relation to the existing
>charter for the W3C Web Access Initiative.
>Many of the issues that impact potential cognitive guidelines have been or
>will be discussed by human factors folks and much could be done by those who
>already do this work.  I do think that guidelines are possible but agree with
>you they should not be co-mingled with the accessible content guidelines.
Received on Saturday, 19 June 1999 13:41:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:04 UTC