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

Re: Editors' draft of WCAG2ICT

From: Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2012 14:28:37 -0400
Message-ID: <500EE955.8000508@w3.org>
To: Peter Korn <peter.korn@oracle.com>
CC: WCAG2ICT <public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org>
Peter Korn wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> In the Introduction
> <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2012/WD-wcag2ict-20120726/#intro>, under
> "Understanding Key Terms", there are several "@@" sections.  Will this
> remain as such in what we publish?  
That's up to you all. I just copied the content in. If somebody has
edits for that section that will reflect the consensus of the group,
please send them my way.
> Also the final paragraph of that section is an Editor note.  Shouldn't
> that be set apart visually somehow?
fixed
>
> The heading of the "Additional guidance" text is styled differently
> for Guidelines vs. SCs.  For SCs the text is in all-caps, with the "A"
> of Additional, the "S" of Success and the "C" of Criterion (along with
> the SC number and "ICT") in boldface; whereas for Guidelines
> everything is in boldface with only initial capitalization.  They
> should be styled the same, and I think the Guidelines styling is
> preferable.
fixed
>
> For each of the Intent sections, are these pulling from the very
> latest Understanding WCAG 2.0 document, which includes the very recent
> changes that have come from WCAG2ICT work?  My spot check of SC 1.3.1
> looks like this was the case.
Yes, they're supposed to be. If there's something not right, it's wrong
in the Understanding as well.
>
> Link errors:
>
>     * http://www.w3.org/TR/wcag2ict/ is bad (2nd link in document)
>
This will become active when the document is formally published.
>
>     * http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wcag2ict/ is bad (3rd link in document)
>
I was holding off on making that link active, but have done so now.
>
>     * http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2012/WD-wcag2ict-20120726/@@URI%20to%20IPP%20status%20or%20other%20page@@
>       is bad (3rd link prior to the Table of Contents)
>
Thanks, fixed.
>
>     * TOC entry for Comments by Guideline and Success Criterion
>       <http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2012/WD-wcag2ict-20120726/#wcag2ict_comments_principles-guidelines-sc>
>       doesn't go anywhere
>
Generator bug, fixed.
>
>     * Guideline 1.1 link to Guideline 1.1 in Understanding WCAG 2.0
>       <http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/NOTE-UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20-20120726//text-equiv#text-equiv-intent-head>:
>       is bad [/*as is the case for all Guideline links in all
>       Guidelines it seems - didn't test these exhaustively*/]
>     * SC1.1.1 link to Understanding Success Criterion 1.1.1 in
>       Understanding WCAG 2.0
>       <http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/NOTE-UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20-20120726//text-equiv-all#text-equiv-all-intent-head>:
>       is bad [/*as is the case for all Understanding SC links in all
>       SCs it seems - didn't test these exhaustively*/]
>
This was a problem with my copy of Understanding, fixed.
>
> Other errors found:
>
>     * SC 4.1.1 text was not approved by WCAG (even thought the TF
>       reached consensus there), so that should read: "/The WCAG2ICT
>       Task Force has not yet produced additional guidance for Success
>       Criterion 4.1.1./"  /*We need to verify this for all the SCs
>       that the TF approved but for which WCAG did NOT approve.  I'm
>       working on that review now...*/
>
Fixed; Andi caught one other instance.

Michael
-- 

Michael Cooper
Web Accessibility Specialist
World Wide Web Consortium, Web Accessibility Initiative
E-mail cooper@w3.org <mailto:cooper@w3.org>
Information Page <http://www.w3.org/People/cooper/>
Received on Tuesday, 24 July 2012 18:28:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 24 July 2012 18:28:43 GMT