W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ua@w3.org > January to March 2000

Re: Raw minutes from UA teleconf 3 Feb 2000

From: mark novak <menovak@facstaff.wisc.edu>
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2000 11:52:57 -0600
Message-Id: <v01540b07b4c88c2bf341@[]>
To: Jon Gunderson <jongund@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Cc: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
hi Jon and all

At 5:32 PM 2/3/00, Jon Gunderson wrote:
>Developing a tool to demonstrate timely access on different plateforms
>would be very useful, but as your early e-mail stated would take some
>resources.  I am not sure the working group has the resources to do this.
>We could maybe ask the ER group to develop this tool.  We want in the
>techniques document the interfaces and strategies that these types of demo
>programs would use, so we can at least point developers in the direction of
>the technical meaning of timely.

Using the ER group sounds like a good idea.  We are also continuing to
plug away with ideas on browser access, perhaps something we create
might serve part of this purpose.  I'll keep you/group posted on that

As for the Techniques DOC.,  I think it alreadys does a good job of
pointing out several of the interfaces and strategies (even source code)
which one could use to access the UA in a timely manner.  It would be
nice if we could strengthen the cross platform areas a bit more.

>I am not sure how to specify absolute or relative timing specifications,
>like how many CPU cycles or less than 1 micorosecond response time.  Any
>ideas or techniques to help make this checkpoint more explicit are wlecome.

I for one don't believe we (e.g., UA group) can or should specify
"absolute" timing
specifications.   I'd rather, from a developer standpoint, understand
the pros/cons of the various methods and be challenged to create and improve
on these.

That is what the fun part of software development is all about ;)

Received on Thursday, 10 February 2000 12:49:52 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:38:25 UTC