<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: WCAG Samurai Peer Review: Part 2</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blackwidows.co.uk/blog/2007/06/10/wcag-samurai-peer-review-part-2/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blackwidows.co.uk/blog/2007/06/10/wcag-samurai-peer-review-part-2/</link>
	<description>The meanderings of a black widow...</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 11:38:53 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Black Widow</title>
		<link>http://blackwidows.co.uk/blog/2007/06/10/wcag-samurai-peer-review-part-2/#comment-29886</link>
		<dc:creator>Black Widow</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Jun 2007 13:29:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blackwidows.co.uk/blog/?p=131#comment-29886</guid>
		<description>I agree. The errata can't possibly provide a proper solution to the problem of cognitive disabilities. All I'm suggesting is that, since the object of the exercise to correct issues in the guidelines, there is some opportunity to correct those that &lt;strong&gt;do&lt;/strong&gt; relate to cognitive disorders. Yes -- it's short-term tinkering with a flawed model but even a little change now could help whilst a more comprehensive solution is investigated.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree. The errata can&#8217;t possibly provide a proper solution to the problem of cognitive disabilities. All I&#8217;m suggesting is that, since the object of the exercise to correct issues in the guidelines, there is some opportunity to correct those that <strong>do</strong> relate to cognitive disorders. Yes &#8212; it&#8217;s short-term tinkering with a flawed model but even a little change now could help whilst a more comprehensive solution is investigated.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joe Clark</title>
		<link>http://blackwidows.co.uk/blog/2007/06/10/wcag-samurai-peer-review-part-2/#comment-29881</link>
		<dc:creator>Joe Clark</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Jun 2007 12:10:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blackwidows.co.uk/blog/?p=131#comment-29881</guid>
		<description>There was no â€œopportunityâ€ to â€œseize.â€ I donâ€™t want to presuppose Gianâ€™s remarks, but, just on principle, a set of &lt;em&gt;errata&lt;/em&gt; for WCAG 1 cannot put on a nice pair of high heels and some glitter and call themselves a full solution to the problem of cognitive disability. Could everyone stop pretending otherwise, please?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There was no â€œopportunityâ€ to â€œseize.â€ I donâ€™t want to presuppose Gianâ€™s remarks, but, just on principle, a set of <em>errata</em> for <acronym title="Web Content Accessibility Guidelines">WCAG</acronym> 1 cannot put on a nice pair of high heels and some glitter and call themselves a full solution to the problem of cognitive disability. Could everyone stop pretending otherwise, please?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
