- From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 11 Oct 1998 23:01:34 -0400
- To: Charles McCathieNevile <charlesmccn@yahoo.com>
- CC: jongund@uiuc.edu, w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Charles McCathieNevile wrote: > > Jon, I am sending this to you because my normal email has temprorarily > died, and I am not sure how open the list is. > > Two comments about the proposed setup: > 1. The GL rating P3 wa changed to 'this guideline may be implemented > to improve access...' giving a MUST/SHOULD/MAY classification which > could be related directly to the three priority grades. Should UA be > looking at something similar? Hi Charles, I just changed this on Friday to must/should/may. The next WG draft will have wording to that effect. > 2. The 'compatibility with assistive technology' sounds pretty woolly > to me. Are we talking about stuff that we ought to be expecting from > the DOM being passed from the browser itself to the assistive > technology, or are we asking everyone to implement Microsoft's Active > Accessibility, or some other standard already in existence? It seems > to me that we should be specifying a standard interface for functions > we are not requiring of the browser itself. I think that's a good idea. Is there a way to use what's in DOM Level 1 since it just became a Recommendation? - Ian -- Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org) Tel/Fax: (212) 684-1814 http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Received on Sunday, 11 October 1998 23:00:18 UTC