Hi.. *Most respectfully*..
Could you then, or perhaps someone else on behalf of Microsoft, provide an accessible alternative for those of us participating who have cognitive disabilities..? It would be my most humble observation followed by presumption that this would be, *in part*, Ian's purpose in providing a smaller version of what was originally submitted for review.. Providing readily available [talking points or table of contents] that lead to the then expanded supportive materials would help accomplish this request.. Thank you so much in advance whichever you decide (so as to save chatter from my end on the list).. Peace and best wishes from Talking Rock.. :) Cindy Sue - :: - CindySueCausey.blogspot.com www.ButterflyBytes.com Georgia Voices That Count, 2005 Talking Rock, GA, USA On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 2:01 PM, Chris Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > No. > > I understand why you might like to edit our feedback, Ian, but your edit does > not, in fact, represent Microsoft's feedback on cross-domain. What you call > "redacting background material" I call "removing principles such that > remaining points might seem unprincipled." The members of the WG (and the > public) are welcome to draw their own conclusions from our statements; I am > NOT willing to have you be the one who draws their conclusions for them. > > As every email software package I'm aware of can handle HTML and text, and > most of them can do an automatic translation between the two of them, I'll > ask you again to not editorialize on Microsoft's motives or actions for the > group. Particularly when you are redacting the very principles at issue.
