LC-678

Discussed in the 10 August 2006 telecon:
resolution: Take 678 back to team C, figure out applicability H72, and
create failure examples in F43 of misuse of the <p> element [1]

We proposed deleting technique H72 because determining when the <p> element
should be used is highly subjective and we didn't see any significant
accessibility barriers created by not using them. We also discussed using
<br/><br/> instead of paragraphs as a possible failure to add to F43.
Again, determining when this is a failure is highly subjective. So we
rejected the recommendation to add an example of this to F43.

Discussed in the 17 August 2006 telecon:
refer LC-678 back to committee [2]

We received only three comments on this last survey

Loretta: Close - I'm not sure exactly what is being proposed. I am ok with
removing the paragraph technique. What else needs to change?

Gez: Keep open - I agree that when to use paragraphs is subjective, but
when they are used, they can benefit people with reading difficulties that
use scripts to enhance the readability, such as striping the content to
make it easier to follow <some code>

Katie: Keep open - I did not come away from the discussion last week with
that perspective. To provide some guidance on paragraphs.......I thought
that we had discussed adding failure techniques such as the misuse of
paragraphs to generate visual spacing (<p></p>) to an existing failure?

I've made another stab at this. [3]

I tried to clarify the proposal in the resolution section for Loretta. For
Gez, I took out the offending wording about paragraphs not providing
significant accessibility benefits. And for Katie, I proposed adding a
failure example on using <p></p> to create blank lines.

[1] http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/20060810-teamc/results#x678
[2] http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/20060817-teamc/results#x678
[3]
http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/issue-tracking/viewdata_individual.php?id=678


Andi

Received on Wednesday, 30 August 2006 11:03:06 UTC