Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:
>>However, you must determine who you care about. Any change will be
painful, especially here. Anything that is proposed,or
affect some proportion of users somewhere. Do we care about
of the users who will gain benefit, or the minority who will
That depends who the minority is. When the minority is a small
user base of geeks who want to use some arcane loophole in
legacy specs I don't much care. If it is a group like visually
impared folk who have a real issue that won't go away that is
a different matter.
Various "Turing test" schemes are in use today for signups, C/R, and
WHOIS lookups. The W3C draft pointed out some of the problems inherent
with these schemes for disabled users. Has there been a response from
the industry? Does anyone really care unless the end-user constituency
is large enough to make a commercial or public difference?
If there is a major deployment constraint that is a show stopper
for a party that supports a large part of the industry that is
something we should listen to.
Well what's defined as "party" and the "industry"?
So far some of the problem raised with LMAP proposals like greeting
cards, forwarding, etc. affect a significant number of companies out
there. We need clear solutions and guidelines on how such companies can
adjust. We also need to think about all of the non-commercial users as well.
Yakov Shafranovich / asrg <at> shaftek.org
SolidMatrix Technologies, Inc. / research <at> solidmatrix.com
"All that is gold does not glitter" (LOTR)
Asrg mailing list