Re: [WCAG2ICT] Agenda for 6 October meeting

Apologies for the tardy response.

I agree with Bruce – I’d prefer future input to be via a survey to avoid email carnage!

> Whether or not to include Level AAA criteria in WCAG2ICT

I would still prefer to not include to avoid confusion when WCAG2ICT is used as reference material in future guidelines, standards or regulations, but would also be happy with the compromise suggested by a few that if included, we also include a note to clarify that these are for information only, and are not mandatory.

> Definition of non-web ICT covered by the WCAG2ICT Note

I think the term non-web ICT is OK to keep, but like the additional comment from Mary Jo
  *   Applying WCAG to hardware aspects of products, non-user interface aspects of platforms, or user-interface components as individual items, because the basic constructs on which WCAG 2.0 is built do not apply to these.

> Publish WCAG2ICT as a W3C Statement instead of a WG Note?

I have no strong feelings – from the discussion it sounds like we can get started earlier with a note so I’m happy with this approach.