W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-comments-wcag20@w3.org > September 2010

Re: Text that is difficult to understand. Needs to be simplified and may be have an illustrative example.

From: Sylvie Duchateau <sylvie.duchateau@snv.jussieu.fr>
Date: Sun, 12 Sep 2010 11:45:25 +0200
Message-ID: <4C8CA135.3050203@snv.jussieu.fr>
To: Loretta Guarino Reid <lorettaguarino@google.com>
CC: sylvie.duchateau@accessiweb.org, public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Hello Loretta,
Thank you for the response. The paragraph is much clearer now.
Best regards
Sylvie

Loretta Guarino Reid a écrit :
> Sylvie,
>
> My apologies! I accidentally sent you the working group response to a
> different comment. Here is the response that should have been sent:
>
> Thank you for bringing this to our attention.  We are simplifying the
> paragraph and providing an example:
>
> Sufficient techniques are provided in a numbered list where each list
> item provides the technique or combination of techniques that can be
> used to meet the Success Criterion. When there are multiple techniques
> on a numbered list item connected by "AND" then all of the techniques
> must be used.
>
> For example, Situation B in Understanding Success Criterion 2.2.1
> lists as the third sufficient technique:
>  SCR16: Providing a script that warns the user a time limit is about
> to expire (Scripting) AND  SCR1: Allowing the user to extend the
> default time limit  (Scripting)
>
> So both SCR16 and SCR1 must be used to satisfy this success criterion.
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 6:46 PM, Loretta Guarino Reid
> <lorettaguarino@google.com> wrote:
>   
>> On Mon, Aug 2, 2010 at 7:54 AM,  <sylvie.duchateau@accessiweb.org> wrote:
>>     
>>> Name: Sylvie Duchateau
>>> Email: sylvie.duchateau@accessiweb.org
>>> Affiliation: Association BrailleNet
>>> Document: TD
>>> Item Number: (none selected)
>>> Part of Item: Applicability
>>> Comment Type: editorial
>>> Summary of Issue: Text that is difficult to understand. Needs to be simplified and may be have an illustrative example.
>>> Comment (Including rationale for any proposed change):
>>> Location : introduction of Techniques for WCAG 2.0 and Understanding WCAG 2.0, Heading h3 "sufficient techniques".
>>> paragraph added on July 2010 draft.
>>>
>>> "[Begin add] In some cases it's only when a combination
>>> of techniques are used that it is considered sufficient. In these cases, the sufficient combination of techniques are listed together on one numbered line
>>>
>>> in the “How to Meet WCAG 2.0” and “Understanding WCAG 2.0” documents. Each numbered line is sufficient to meet the Success Criteria it addresses, but the
>>>
>>> individual techniques on that line are not sufficient by themselves unless they are on a numbered line by themselves.[end add]
>>>
>>>
>>> Proposed Change:
>>> Simplify this paragraph that does not sound clear at all.
>>> What does this "numbered line" wording mean?
>>> May be giving an example to illustrate what is meant would be helpful.
>>>
>>>
>>>       
>> ================================
>> Response from the Working Group
>> ================================
>> Thank you for alerting us to this improvement in Firefox, and for
>> identifying the places that needed updating. We have determined that
>> this fix occurred in Firefox 3.0, so instead of removing Firefox from
>> the User Agent Notes, we have corrected them to versions of Firefox
>> before Firefox 3.0.
>>
>> In general, we have not added the notes about Safari to the
>> descriptions of the techniques. Safari's restrictions are included in
>> the User Agent Notes, and including the Safari restrictions in the
>> descriptions makes the techniques more difficult to understand.
>>
>>
>> Loretta Guarino Reid, WCAG WG Co-Chair
>> Gregg Vanderheiden, WCAG WG Co-Chair
>> Michael Cooper, WCAG WG Staff Contact
>>
>>
>> On behalf of the WCAG Working Group
>>
>>     
>
>   
Received on Sunday, 12 September 2010 09:45:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:11:13 UTC