Re[2]: Help needed with numbering success criteria for WCAG 2.1

Thanks for the input Jason, noted.

Josh

------ Original Message ------
From: "White, Jason J" <jjwhite@ets.org>
To: "John Foliot" <john.foliot@deque.com>; "josh@interaccess.ie" 
<josh@interaccess.ie>
Cc: "WCAG" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Sent: 26/06/2016 22:47:32
Subject: RE: Help needed with numbering success criteria for WCAG 2.1

>
>
>
>
>From: John Foliot [mailto:john.foliot@deque.com]
>Sent: Sunday, June 26, 2016 4:32 PM
>
>
>I would be interested in this activity. I have some thoughts on this 
>already (I know, shocking huh?), but I'm also interested to hear 
>other's ideas as well.
>
>[Jason] A solution that might work would be to add a prefix letter 
>(e.g., “x”) to the number of every modified or promoted success 
>criterion. This would clearly distinguish version 2.1 from version 2.0 
>success criteria for authors, evaluation tools and in other contexts.
>
>I think it should be decided, case by case, whether to rewrite and 
>expand the scope of an existing guideline or success criterion, or 
>whether to introduce a new one. Readability for users of version 2.1 
>would have priority, in my mind, over backward compatibility. Once 
>people move to the new version, the older version becomes much less 
>relevant to most of their work.
>
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or 
>confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for 
>whom it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received 
>this e-mail in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, 
>distribute, or take any action in reliance on the contents of this 
>information; and delete it from your system. Any other use of this 
>e-mail is prohibited.
>
>
>Thank you for your compliance.
>
>--------------------------------------------------------------------------------