- From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 04 Dec 1999 12:41:25 -0500
- To: "Leonard R. Kasday" <kasday@ACM.org>
- CC: Denis Anson <danson@miseri.edu>, w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
"Leonard R. Kasday" wrote: > > At 11:51 AM 12/3/99 -0500, Denis Anson wrote: > >Len, > > > >My take is that the conformance ratings are for general purpose browsers, > >which must accommodate all users. If you make a browser that is focused on > >the needs of a single group, and is not intended to be accessible for all > >users, then the conformance ratings simply don't apply. > > That's a possibility but if that's the philosophy it should be explicit and > highlighted. > > Plus there's still the case... though it may be unlikely... that someone > designs a browser with built in output access to all disabilities, > including e.g. built in sound, drivers for most Braille terminals, > magnification, captioning, etc. For the sake of example, assume the input > follows standards. I think they should be allowed at least an A rating > even if they don't have a standard API for output. If they system on which the software runs does not have a standard API, then the standard output API requirement doesn't apply. If the tool runs on a system where it is not possible to operate the software with other software, the output API requirement would also not apply and the tool could thus conform. - Ian -- Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs Tel/Fax: +1 212 684-1814 Cell: +1 917 450-8783
Received on Saturday, 4 December 1999 12:41:30 UTC