- From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2000 16:51:23 -0400
- To: Jon Gunderson <jongund@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
- CC: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Jon Gunderson wrote: > > Ian, > > One option to make applicability clearer would be to add an applicability > clause to checkpoints in section 5.1, 5.2, 5.3 and 5.4. For example: > > [CURRENT] > Checkpoint 4.1 Allow the user to configure and control the reference size > of text with an option to override author-specified user agent default text > size. Make available the range of system font sizes. > [/CURRENT] > > [NEW] > Checkpoint 4.1 If user agent supports graphical rendering of content, allow > the user to configure and control the reference size of text with an option > to override author-specified user agent default text size. Make available > the range of system font sizes. > [/NEW] > > The main disadvantage of this is increasing the length of the checkpoint. > > I think we had considered this option a long time ago with these types of > checkpoints, what do you think about this approach now? I thought the checkpoints would be too long in some cases. So it's natural to factor out the redundant info into centralized applicability provisions. - Ian -- Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs Tel: +1 831 457-2842 Cell: +1 917 450-8783
Received on Wednesday, 23 August 2000 16:51:26 UTC