-----Original Message----- Christophe: Could you explain where the mistake is? The note does not refer to a (non-existing) technique but just says "failure threshold" (general flash and red flash thresholds are defined at <http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/seizure-does-not-violate.html#gen eral-thresholddef>). That should be OK. The WCAG WG chose not to write failures that would just state the inverse of a sucess criterion. Roberto Scano: My question was: is really necessary to refer in a note to something that didn't exist (a failure with "3.5 flashes or more")Received on Thursday, 19 March 2009 13:57:14 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 22 March 2009 02:51:44 GMT