- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2001 21:45:01 -0500 (EST)
- To: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-edapta@idyllmtn.com>
- cc: <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Well, there is the possibilty to get valuable data here - the IG is a bigger group than WCAG. For example, Vadim started to talk on this list about what kind of machines people have in Eastern Europe. There appear to be more users of Konqueror, Mozilla, links, w3m, and DOS on this list than that one. And the people here are not bound to work on the agenda of WCAG, which also includes lots of other discussions. There may be a few people here with an interst and contribution in one area, who will not otherwise have it heard. But I stand by the request for people to give their conclusions to the WCAG group, after checking where they are at with the issue. cheers Charles McCN On Wed, 26 Dec 2001, Kynn Bartlett wrote: At 9:07 PM -0500 12/26/01, Charles McCathieNevile wrote: >When this thread started it was about what are the minimum capabilities we >can expect users to have (through their browsers). Very little data has come >out of it, so I am going to break this question into several smaller >questions, and see if we can get more signal. I think you were right at the start of the thread (and I was wrong); the "minimum browser capabilities" discussion is a topic for WCAG and not general IG talk. I'll post a reply there. --Kynn -- Charles McCathieNevile http://www.w3.org/People/Charles phone: +61 409 134 136 W3C Web Accessibility Initiative http://www.w3.org/WAI fax: +1 617 258 5999 Location: 21 Mitchell street FOOTSCRAY Vic 3011, Australia (or W3C INRIA, Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France)
Received on Wednesday, 26 December 2001 21:45:02 UTC