Re: CfC: Addition to WCAG 2.0 errata

WCAGers,
As we have received only positive feedback leading up to this CfC and no negative responses during it, this CfC is agreed on as a consensus opinion of the working group.

This decision is recorded at https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Decisions


Thanks,
AWK

Andrew Kirkpatrick
Group Product Manager, Accessibility and Standards
Adobe

akirkpat@adobe.com
http://twitter.com/awkawk

From: Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com<mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com>>
Date: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 at 11:20
To: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
Subject: CfC: Addition to WCAG 2.0 errata
Resent-From: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
Resent-Date: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 at 11:20

CALL FOR CONSENSUS – ends Thursday April 21 at 11:30am Boston time.

The Working Group is chartered to publish an edited version of the WCAG 2.0 document that incorporates editorial errata.  An editorial issue that exists on the current list is:

Success Criterion 1.4.3<http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-WCAG20-20081211/#visual-audio-contrast-contrast> point "Logotypes" states "Text that is part of a logo or brand name has no minimum contrast requirement." The word "minimum", not used in the other points, implies a difference in meaning that is not intended. For clarity and consistency, remove the word "minimum" from this point.

We received a comment that this should apply to SC 1.4.6 as well since the language is identical and the working group discussed this on the call and in a survey (https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/NewWCAGEditRec/results#xq7) and agreed to add this as a new errata.

If you have concerns about this proposed consensus position that have not been discussed already and feel that those concerns result in you “not being able to live with” this position, please let the group know before the CfC deadline.

Thanks,
AWK

Andrew Kirkpatrick
Group Product Manager, Accessibility and Standards
Adobe

akirkpat@adobe.com<mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com>
http://twitter.com/awkawk