Re: Editorial Comments

Jon Gunderson wrote:
> 
> Comments on 23 March Draft
> 1. Are Checkpoints 2.5 and 2.6, special cases of Checkpoint 2.1?  Do we
> need to put a reference in or possibly remove the checkpoints?

I don't think we should remove the checkpoints. I am ok to add 
cross-refs.
 
> 2. Checkpoint 3.4: Add technique to configure to selectively turn off
> script execution.  For example do not process user interface event
> handlers, or subsets of user interface event handlers.

Ok. Actually, very much in line with your desire for increased
granularity, I intend to add the following note to this checkpoint
(and a similar one about style sheets later on):

   <BLOCKQUOTE>
   Scripts and applets may provide very useful
   functionality, not all of which causes accessibility
   problems. Developers should not consider that the user's 
   ability to turn off scripts is an effective way to improve    
   content accessibility; turning off scripts means losing the 
   benefits they offer.  Instead, developers should provide users 
   with finer control over user agent or content behavior known 
   to raise accessibility barriers.  The user should only have 
   to turn off scripts as a last resort.
   </BLOCKQUOTE>
 
> 3. Checkpoint 4.11: Can we using "talking rate" instead of "playback
> rate".  Playback doesn't seem to be the right term for synthesized speech.

I agree with David's suggestion of "speech rate".
 
> 4. Checkpoint 5.4: Add onChangeEvent to example in the note

Ok.
 
> 5. Checkpoint 9.5 "Use make available" terminology, instead of query?

Done.
 
Thanks Jon,

 _ Ian
-- 
Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel:                         +1 831 457-2842
Cell:                        +1 917 450-8783

Received on Saturday, 31 March 2001 11:26:38 UTC