- From: Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com>
- Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 15:09:24 -0700 (PDT)
- To: "'wai-ig list'" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>, "'Chris Reeve'" <chrisreeve15@yahoo.com>
In my interpretation of WCAG 2 it is the author of the link responsibility to indicate that it is a link to a PDF but not that persons responsibility to write an HTML synopsis of the PDF. I don't think most people would be qualified to write an HTML synopsis of other people's PDF nor do I think all PDF authors would want that and I do not believe it is required for conformance. Jonathan -----Original Message----- From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of David Woolley Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2009 5:17 PM To: Chris Reeve Cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org Subject: Re: 2.4.4 Sample Chris Reeve wrote: > Can somebody make a recommendation to WCAG 2 that it should be the > responsibility of the developer's site that maintains downlodable file, > or one of the two sites (my site or the developers site)? > > Even if it weren't past cut off for comments, I don't think that anyone but you has a problem with the intent that it is the responsibility of the author of the link (i.e. you). -- David Woolley Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may want. RFC1855 says there should be an address here, but, in a world of spam, that is no longer good advice, as archive address hiding may not work.
Received on Thursday, 6 August 2009 22:32:54 UTC