- From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2001 15:48:19 -0400
- To: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Hi folks, I probably shouldn't do this, but I am curious to know whether people think we should break UAAG 1.0 and the Techniques documents into smaller chunks. UAAG 1.0 (not including the appendixes) is 322k. The Techniques Document is 533k. These are both on the long side. It would be possible (though I haven't tried it yet to see what kind of effort is required) to split the document(s) into smaller pieces. We would also provide a link at the top to a single source HTML version (essentially, what people get today). The W3C Process Document [1] has been organized this way. Essentially, you only get the table of contents on the first page (in the Process Document case, that's only 18k). In the UAAG 1.0 case, it makes sense to split the document into the following pieces: a) Front page b) Introduction c) Guidelines d) Conformance e) Glossary f) References g) Acknowledgments For instance, the Guidelines section (the longest) would only be approximately 162k. The appendixes (checklists and summary) would still have their own URIs (but are considered part of the document package). The navigation mechanisms of the Process Document are pretty straightforward: you have next/previous/contents links at the top of each section. Obviously, this doesn't change the substance of the document, but it may be worth exploring. Your comments welcome, - Ian [1] http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Process-20010208/ -- Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs Tel: +1 831 457-2842 Cell: +1 917 450-8783
Received on Monday, 9 April 2001 15:48:20 UTC