- From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2000 13:12:08 -0400
- To: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
- CC: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Al Gilman wrote: > > Is there also the option to remove the detail, leave the checkpoint in the > document at its present priority without benefit of a minimum implementation? > > One question is whether the other checkpoints for this guideline fully > cover the guideline or not. I will have to look at it that way. I haven't > tried to defend the guideline without this checkpoint. If removing this > checkpoint leaves a hole in the coverage of the guideline, it may be better > to leave it vague than leave it out. It is my opinion that we need a structured navigation checkpoint. We have merged a number of past checkpoints into this one and removing it would leave a gap in the spec. I think that your proposal of removing the list of elements is reasonable, but other checkpoints (7.7 configuration of 7.6, and 8.4 outline) depend on this list as part of their minimal requirements. We would have to rework the lot of them. -Ian -- Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs Tel: +1 831 457-2842 Cell: +1 917 450-8783
Received on Friday, 1 September 2000 13:12:11 UTC