W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org > July 2012

Re: Looking at SC 3.1.2 more generally [was Re: SC-by-SC analysis of UI Context [was Re: User Interface Context]]

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2012 08:10:34 -0500
To: Peter Korn <peter.korn@oracle.com>
Cc: public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org
Message-id: <81A09FF9-F4CC-4310-AEA9-0761A3BB6648@trace.wisc.edu>


On Jul 13, 2012, at 12:46 PM, Peter Korn wrote:

> Hi Gregg,
> 
> PK: OK, I see now that Proposal #3 and Proposal #4 for 3.1.2 Language of Parts are actually quite different; adding in "User Interface Context" in the Note of proposal #4 is only a small part of the re-work.  And... as you say below, "that is just a note and the word used there are not important".
> 
> So I suggest we survey 3.1.2 for our Tuesday meeting, and I suggest the survey ask folks to look at both proposals #3 and #4 -> to say whether they prefer one or the other, or would prefer either with xx changed, or that both are bad.
> 
> Andi?

GV 4:  sounds fine to me. 
> 
> 
> Peter
> 
> On 7/13/2012 1:56 AM, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Jul 13, 2012, at 4:25 AM, Peter Korn wrote:
>> 
>>> Gregg,
>>> 
>>> 
>>>>> <PK>
>>>>> Gregg, in your e-mail below you wrote that you guys did new proposals for 2.4.6 and 3.1.2.  Neither of those mention "web page", nor did I see anything new there.  Did you mean those SCs or other ones?
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> GV: 2.4.6 is a typo of some sort since 2.4.6 is already a closed item.
>>>> I can't find any other open item so...   just ignore it.   don't know what would go in its place. 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 3.1.2  - there is a new proposal #4
>>> 
>>> PK: Sorry, I missed it.  Didn't see "web page" in the SC, and when I scanned for "User Interface Context", I didn't make it through the Note to see it there toward the end.  I don't see how this is an improvement.  Why not just say "...it can be assumed that all TEXT within that document or USER INTERFACE ELEMENTS with that application will be using the same language unless it is indicated"?  Since we only care about the text of the UI elements, we could even simplify further to: "...it can be assumed that all TEXT within that document or application will be using the same language unless it is indicated"
>> 
>> GV2:  that is just a note and the words used there are not important.   Just using terms consistently.     You could use "parts" there and it would work as well.   
>> 
>> GV2:  the key here is the paragraph above that.   
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Peter
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> <oracle_sig_logo.gif>
>>> Peter Korn | Accessibility Principal
>>> Phone: +1 650 5069522 
>>> 500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood City, CA 94065 
>>> <green-for-email-sig_0.gif> Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
> -- 
> <oracle_sig_logo.gif>
> Peter Korn | Accessibility Principal
> Phone: +1 650 506 9522 
> Oracle Corporate Architecture Group
> 500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood City, CA 94065 
> Note: @sun.com e-mail addresses will shortly no longer function; be sure to use: peter.korn@oracle.com to reach me
> <green-for-email-sig_0.gif> Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment




Received on Monday, 16 July 2012 13:11:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 16 July 2012 13:11:12 GMT