Posted 15 January 2000 by Jason White
TN not clear how the 3 parts fit together. an explanation of the framework in the introduction. abstract.
WL is this the first publication of the AAA logo?
GR my site uses.
DC has seen it somewhere.
WC what about the use of the general techniques as index rather than the old checkpoint map?
TN yes, less jumping around is good.
MM perhaps a version that can be printed.
TN if have print of techniques and guidelines, can go to the other document. want as self-contained and self-explanatory as possible.
DC want it by HTML element.
WC we have an index by HTML element, HTML module is structured by the HTML spec.
CMN 2 user scenarios: 1. how do i meet this requirement is still really painful since you have to go to a number of places. even if you end up with 2 documents that repeat the same info in different order, then don't have to find the various pieces. found it frustrating to go to different places.
TN and if have it off-line that's not practical. can't read for general overview. end up not following links and getting the information.
WL if you're online is it feasible to have a choice of different methods of organizing the information. then you could organized by HTML tags, by priority, etc.
CMN more work for editors. effectively it's two documents. basically asking for a checklist that does not map to other places but includes info in-line.
WC but then becomes really long. will someone really print it out? someone way to divide it up?
DC isn't charles' suggestion more like the curriculum?
CMN yes, but i'm suggesting that there are 2 documents. HTML "hat" so that it meets WCAG and "how do i meet WCAG" hat. read checklist techniques where it's the same content.
WL this one only has "contents" rather than "checklist" link.
WC want to add links to HTML and CSS technique right at the top.
DB the checkpoint checklist is what i use the most. i can't print it out by itself. it's hard to e-mail. the simpler you can make it the better. checkpoints in table format are the easiest to use. then techniques if we could organize to go from checkpoint to techniques would be good. make it easy to e-mail people. a button that would allow you to e-mail the checklist.
CMN asking for a version of the techniques exactly like the AU techniques that doesn't have any mapping.
WC it gets really long.
NN checkpoint summary would cue memory. if reading linearly and talking about comprehension need checkpoint text.
WC describes how it is.
GR use a title in the references to jog memory.
NN don't want full description just the gestalt.
@@WC add "title" to checkpoints, use this in the "checkpoints in this section" rather than numbers OR make the headings more specific.
CMN wanting to read through checklist to get the gestalt of each technique. Need reminders at checklist. The text that is in the heading is not descriptive enough.
/* GV joins */
/* discuss his comments to Canady which he will be resubmitting with minor revisions. */
GV once ADA was introduced people scared it would shut down the economy. after 508 came out it was not being enforced. companies were coming to me saying to get things going. there has to be a consistent commitment across companies. if we invest and no one else does, companies get scared.
CMN incorporate all of the content. don't just point to it. you may read the access note separately, but my understanding is that the access notes are published as press pieces.
WL in going through the SMIL access notes, should we mark what should be inline in techniques. who should do this?
@@WL go through CSS note to determine what should be incorporated into the CSS module.
CMN would volunteer for SVG but wary of pulling it out into too many different places. what kind of structure should we have? an images module or SVG? what kind of structure does it follow? inline in checkpoints or piece by piece through SVG spec like the HTML module works.
@@CMN go through checkpoints to see where they apply to SVG.
WL SVG mentioned in guidelines?
@@WC go through SMIL note to see what we want to incorporate into teh techniques document.
WC talked w/daniel, how fit into the guidelines? doesn't seem appropriate.
DC talking more about techiques than guidelines. there are so many ways to implement.
WC think that all we can do is say, "ensure that documents produced with XML DTD conform to WCAG."
CMN different type of technique but should be included.
WL don't see a reason why we shouldn't. very important to have XML recipes in technique.
@@Resolution: in techniques document e.g., under checkpoint 1.1 where it says, "provide alt-text for image" (in HTML module) say "where can include multimedia, allow author to provide text equivalent" (in XML module).
CMN it's inaccessible and that's that. more interesting for javascript and java where there is a heap of stuff you can do. we should hunt down the info and put it in or link to it. that's a lot of work for us to do.
WL is it a mistake that Flash is an authoring tool?
CMN yes. it is a format.
GV Flash came up in the hearings. I was asked, "Can you make it accessible." Yes, you can make any site accessible. This is an issue we will have to address with something other than, "don't use it." it's like DOS and Windows - many people will want to stay in DOS.
TN we have to do this in managable chunks. Thus, we at first need general principles. Using PDF and Flash will have implications and put some pointers to start info.
CMN it's an ongoing whole process. we should try to get everything out of what we can do. e.g. get what we can into PDF.
TN don't be negative but be realistic.
CMN if you're going to use PDF, this is what you are losing. Some group will use PDF for whatever reason, what do we particularly have to provide to solve the problems. If we can get that subset clearly identified and work out what it does and does not do then we can say, "you may not have to rebuild everything, but perhaps use these smaller work-arounds."
WL any position about plug-ins in general.
CMN in general you need not rely on them.
@@MM work on PDF issues and techniques.
@@WC follow-up on Flash techniques with Rob Neff.
WL what about the other plug-ins. These are mostly members of the consortium who are skirting the W3C technologies.
CMN it's usually to do something that W3C support. there is no W3C equivalent for Flash. SVG will provide some of this.
$Date: 2000/11/08 08:30:14 $ Wendy Chisholm