W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > July to September 2008

Re: G5 sufficient for 2.2.1?

From: Loretta Guarino Reid <lorettaguarino@google.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 16:22:57 -0700
Message-ID: <824e742c0809121622n24526ea5id5f5ec05193b108f@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Cynthia Shelly" <cyns@exchange.microsoft.com>
Cc: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>

I agree. It is the sort of "null" technique that we don't usually
write up, but since we list it for 2.2.3, we should list it for 2.2.1
as well.

On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 4:10 PM, Cynthia Shelly
<cyns@exchange.microsoft.com> wrote:
> Shouldn't G5 "G5: Allowing users to complete an activity without any time
> limit" be sufficient for 2.2.1 (Timing Adjustable)?  If you have no timed
> events, then you don't need to make them adjustable, right?  I'd like to see
> it there as a way to meet the L1, since a lot of people won't look at the
> L3.
Received on Friday, 12 September 2008 23:23:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:34:04 UTC