- From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 01 Dec 1999 07:37:53 -0500
- To: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- CC: Kynn Bartlett <kynn-hwg@idyllmtn.com>, love26@gorge.net, au <w3c-wai-au@w3.org>
Charles McCathieNevile wrote: > > To get to a concrete proposal on this: > > I suggest that we add to the document, in the section on prioriteis and how > they are defined, the following note: > > In formulating these priorities and applying them to checkpoints "the > author" is assumed to be someone who is a competent but not necessarily > expert user of the tool, who may have no prior knowledge of > accessibility. For example we do not expect tham to have read all the help > documentation, but we expect them to know how to use it to find something > they are looking for. I like the ideas. Minor editing: In choosing priority levels for checkpoints, the Working Group has assumed that "the author" is a competent, but not necessarily expert, user of the authoring tool, and that the author has no prior knowledge of accessibility. For example, the author is not expected to have read all of the documentation but is expected to know how to turn to the documentation for assistance. - Ian -- Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs Tel/Fax: +1 212 684-1814 Cell: +1 917 450-8783
Received on Wednesday, 1 December 1999 07:38:11 UTC