- From: Joe Clark <joeclark@joeclark.org>
- Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 17:04:53 +0000 (UTC)
- To: WAI-IG <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
> Note that WCAG 2.0 is not setting specific requirements about either.
> Instead, these are mentioned as examples of alternatives to what we
> think of as site nav igation mechanisms in common use on the web today.
That is rather irrelevant, off-topic, and Useless futuristic fantasizing
for a standards document, don't you think?
You're not just trying to defend every word of WCAG 1, even the very
stupidest words (as these are), to the very end?
> Hope this helps,
Sadly, no.
--
Joe Clark | joeclark@joeclark.org
Accessibility <http://joeclark.org/access/>
Expect criticism if you top-post
Received on Wednesday, 10 November 2004 17:05:01 UTC