Re: Summary of 2.1 discussion an attempt at consensus

On 16/07/2016 10:32, David MacDonald wrote:
> I'd like to try to come to a temporary resolution:
>
> This thread and it's variations are over 65 emails long. Many of those
> are substantive. This represents valuable resources from all parties,
> and this is before the wider group and the public even see it.
>
> I think Patrick has successfully communicated his vision so that we
> understand what he is trying to accomplish. Also, I think Patrick has
> explained that the main reason for the consolidation is to try to make
> the standard more elegant, and shorter, rather than change what we are
> trying to require.

The main aim was to avoid having developers look over SCs and wondering 
"hey, isn't this pretty much the same as this other thing?"

But I'll be honest at this stage I cannot be bothered to pursue this any 
further.  I'll save my energy for WCAG 3.0/next/Silver and Gold.

> We have been asked to come up with SCs that address the new reality of
> touch screen and small devices.
 > It was a good effort to try to work
 > those into the bigger picture, and try to solve a whole bunch of other
 > WCAG issues outside our scope, but I think the consolidation
 > considerations are super complex and can be handled by the larger group,
 > after we address the current outstanding comments from the group and get
 > consensus among ourselves and then the wider group about "what" to put
 > into WCAG 2.1, rather than "how" we present it.

Related: any thoughts on 
https://github.com/w3c/Mobile-A11y-Extension/issues/6 ? It seems there's 
lots of other input-related things that are proposed in this TF which 
don't quite feel touch/small device specific.

P
-- 
Patrick H. Lauke

www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com
twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke

Received on Sunday, 17 July 2016 19:32:10 UTC