- From: Denis Anson <danson@miseri.edu>
- Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2001 09:18:36 -0700
- To: "Ian Jacobs" <ij@w3.org>, <w3c-wai-ua@w3.org>
Ian, The only weakness of this checkpoint that I see is the law of unintended consequences: You don't always know how a change affects accessibility. Certainly, we want to know how you have improved accessibility, but would any developer deliberately decrease access? Changes in that direction would be inadvertant, and probably not known. I'm pretty sure, for example, that when IE 4.0 was released, it wasn't deliberate that it broke access. So, if a developer did something that changed access accidentally, would the developer lose conformance when a user contested this? Denis -----Original Message----- From: w3c-wai-ua-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ua-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Ian Jacobs Sent: Friday, April 13, 2001 8:21 PM To: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org Subject: [Editorial] Proposed clarification to checkpoint 12.5 (documentation of changes that affect accessibility) Hello, In the 9 April draft [1], checkpoint 12.5 reads: "12.5 In each software release, document all changes that affect accessibility." I think this checkpoint is could be interpreted as making a requirement that spans more than one release of a user agent. This would make conformance for a specific release of a user agent impossible. Instead, I propose the following language, which I consider an editorial clarification: "12.5 Document all changes from the previous version of the user agent that affect accessibility." Comments: - The term "release" has been replaced by "version", which is the term used in the section on conformance. _ Ian [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-UAAG10-20010409/ -- Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs Tel: +1 831 457-2842 Cell: +1 917 450-8783
Received on Saturday, 14 April 2001 08:18:47 UTC