- From: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2006 08:55:48 -0500
- To: Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org>
- Cc: Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>, wai-eo-editors <wai-eo-editors@w3.org>
> Done except for "Accessibility Barriers". During the last EOWG call, the > group was leaning to have "Addressed Barriers" on the accessible pages, > and "Accessibility Barriers" on the inaccessible ones to provide more > clarity. Do you have a different opinion? Ah, that was the part of the meeting that I missed. SORRY! I think it's confusing to have different words. The links go to the same place. That place is a list of accessibility barriers -- which are broken in one version and fixed in another version, but the whole point is that both links go to the same list of barriers. So, yes, I have a different opinion. However, it's not a show-stopper and I'm willing to go with group consensus (I guess ;). >> Now that it's not so "obnoxious", I think it might be smoother just to >> include the whole copyright notice, rather than pointing to it. > > Made both changes but think it is too long despite the small font. > However, I don't feel strongly about it at all... Oops -- I meant include the whole *copyright* notice (rather than just part and pointing to the rest), and not the whole footer. I agree with you *not* to include on the demo pages themselves: "Editors: Shadi Abou-Zahra and the Before/After Demo Task Force (BAD TF) of the Education and Outreach Working Group (EOWG). Developed with support from WAI-TIES, a project of the European Commission IST Programme. [see change log]" but instead just to point to the overview page for this. > FYI: personally I like using "BAD" and find it somewhat catchy but I > also recall some opposition of using this acronym in public. Then I think we need to re-evaluate that. I think we should use it in public. Catchy is good!!! "BAD" is OK 'cause we're showing a bad site! :-) an aside: at UPA, Steve Krug[1] said that we're never going to get anyway where with a name like "Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG)", we need something catchy, like AJAX. heh. [1] fairly well known & respected author of "Don't Make Me Think" http://www.sensible.com/ > Still working on color schemes for the banners with the designer, its an > open issue. I've done a quick fix for now: only the borders are green as > opposed to the whole background. Is this *idea* working better for you? good to try other things! but, um.... not so much. Perhaps if the other green border was there (right now missing border between banner and page , and what about using the loud border and then a quiet color inside the box -- so the box is differentiated from the Citylights page? ~ shawn
Received on Tuesday, 1 August 2006 13:55:53 UTC