Sorry for the late response Jonathan.
So my thoughts (aka not the BBC's), on the Accessible Rich Internet
Applications drafts are that we need to feed into them at this stage so
they don't become the mess which some people [1] are calling WCAG 2.0
[2]. Actually we all need to pay attention and feed into the W3C ARIA
drafts.
There is a meme out there that the W3C is still catching up or even lost
its way with what's going on in Web 2.0. But I always say, the W3C is
actually made up of people and without them things will seem to grow old
and stagnant.
Generally the roadmap looks good but I'm not developing at the sharp
end. I tend to develop simple forms and interfaces.
Cheers,
Ian
[1] - http://alistapart.com/articles/tohellwithwcag2
[2] - http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/
Jonathan Chetwynd wrote:
Whilst recognising that the the BBC is still struggling to come to
terms with WCAG1.0 it might be interesting to know what Ian, Matthew
and others make of:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-aria-roadmap-20060926/
http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-aria-role-20060926/
http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-aria-state-20060926/
cheers
Jonathan Chetwynd
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe,
please visit
http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
Unofficial list archive:
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
-
Sent via the backstage.bbc.co.uk discussion group. To unsubscribe, please
visit http://backstage.bbc.co.uk/archives/2005/01/mailing_list.html.
Unofficial list archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
