w3c-wai-gl@w3.org from July to September 2016 by author

Adam Solomon

• Re: Volunteers needed for 3 comments (Sunday, 7 August)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)

Adam Zerner

• Re: Proposed SC: Unique Titles - or - Unique & Updated Titles (Friday, 12 August)

ALAN SMITH

• RE: Should we talk about an icon for transcripts in WCAG 2.1? (Wednesday, 7 September)
• RE: Proposed SC: Unique Titles - or - Unique & Updated Titles (Thursday, 11 August)
• RE: Accessibility Conformance Testing Task Force (Tuesday, 9 August)
• RE: Success Criteria Requirements (Tuesday, 9 August)
• RE: Accessibility Conformance Testing Task Force (Tuesday, 9 August)
• RE: Success Criteria guidance (Wednesday, 3 August)
• RE: Success Criteria guidance (Wednesday, 3 August)
• RE: 1100% may be physically impossible and still not achieve the results on smaller monitors (Wednesday, 6 July)
• 1100% may be physically impossible and still not achieve the results on smaller monitors (Wednesday, 6 July)

alands289@gmail.com

• RE: [Minutes] WCAG Accessibility Conformance Testing (ACT) Task Force- Meeting on 28 September 2016 (Thursday, 29 September)
• RE: Adding a resource to Understanding 2.4.2 (Tuesday, 27 September)

Alastair Campbell

• Re: Question: testing for non-unique id values SC 4.1.1 (Friday, 30 September)
• Re: Question: testing for non-unique id values SC 4.1.1 (Friday, 30 September)
• FW: WCAG Agenda Sept 27th, 2016 (Monday, 26 September)
• Re: Failures Definition (Problem?) (Thursday, 22 September)
• Re: Failures Definition (Problem?) (Thursday, 22 September)
• Missing scribing notes (Tuesday, 20 September)
• Re: WCAG Agenda September 13th, 2016 (Friday, 9 September)
• Re: WCAG Agenda August 16, 2016 (Tuesday, 16 August)
• Re: Parallax and vestibular disorders (Wednesday, 10 August)
• Re: Parallax and vestibular disorders (Monday, 8 August)
• Re: Parallax and vestibular disorders (Wednesday, 3 August)
• Re: Parallax and vestibular disorders (Tuesday, 2 August)
• Re: Color Contrast and Transparency | WCAG 2.1 (Friday, 29 July)
• Re: Parallax and vestibular disorders (Thursday, 28 July)
• Re: Parallax and vestibular disorders (Thursday, 28 July)
• Parallax and vestibular disorders (Wednesday, 27 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Wednesday, 20 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Wednesday, 20 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Wednesday, 20 July)
• Re: Automated A11y non-issues and SC Parsing 4.1.1 (Monday, 18 July)
• Re: New SC: Meaningful element name (Monday, 18 July)
• Re: New SC: Avoid disrupting working accessibility features (Friday, 15 July)
• Re: Re[2]: Should we drop any WCAG 2 SCs in 2.1? (Friday, 15 July)
• Re: Should we drop any WCAG 2 SCs in 2.1? (Friday, 15 July)
• Re: Responsive tables and accessibility (Wednesday, 13 July)
• Re: Responsive tables and accessibility (Wednesday, 13 July)
• Re: Responsive tables and accessibility (Tuesday, 12 July)
• Re: WCAG Agenda July 12th 2016 (Tuesday, 12 July)
• Re: 1100% may be physically impossible and still not achieve the results on smaller monitors (Tuesday, 12 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Friday, 8 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Friday, 8 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Thursday, 7 July)
• Re: 1100% may be physically impossible and still not achieve the results on smaller monitors (Thursday, 7 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Wednesday, 6 July)
• User agent SCs? (Wednesday, 6 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Wednesday, 6 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Wednesday, 6 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Tuesday, 5 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Tuesday, 5 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)

Andrew Kirkpatrick

• Re: Question: testing for non-unique id values SC 4.1.1 (Friday, 30 September)
• Re: Question: testing for non-unique id values SC 4.1.1 (Thursday, 29 September)
• Re: Question: testing for non-unique id values SC 4.1.1 (Thursday, 29 September)
• Adding a resource to Understanding 2.4.2 (Tuesday, 27 September)
• WCAG meeting with DPUB in DPUB room (Monday, 19 September)
• Remote participation for TPAC (Thursday, 15 September)
• Re: Should we talk about an icon for transcripts in WCAG 2.1? (Wednesday, 7 September)
• Re: feedback loops (Wednesday, 31 August)
• WCAG Agenda August 30, 2016 (Monday, 29 August)
• Re: CfC: H73 `summary` is obsoleted by HTML5 (Monday, 29 August)
• Re: CfC: Ruby changes (Monday, 29 August)
• Re: CfC: Updates to H28 resources (Monday, 29 August)
• Re: CfC: Consider SMIL (Monday, 29 August)
• Re: CfC: H64 & H70 `frame` is obsoleted by HTML5 (Monday, 29 August)
• Re: CfC: Issue 207 (Monday, 29 August)
• CfC: Updates to H28 resources (Wednesday, 24 August)
• CfC: H64 & H70 `frame` is obsoleted by HTML5 (Wednesday, 24 August)
• CfC: H73 `summary` is obsoleted by HTML5 (Wednesday, 24 August)
• CfC: Ruby changes (Wednesday, 24 August)
• CfC: Consider SMIL (Wednesday, 24 August)
• CfC: Issue 207 (Wednesday, 24 August)
• Error in response to PDF3 public comment (Monday, 22 August)
• WCAG Agenda August 23, 2016 (Monday, 22 August)
• Re: CfC: Issue 215 (Monday, 22 August)
• Re: CfC: Issue 220 (Monday, 22 August)
• Re: CfC: Issue 209 (Monday, 22 August)
• Re: CfC: Issue 216 (Monday, 22 August)
• CfC: Issue 215 (Tuesday, 16 August)
• CfC: Issue 220 (Tuesday, 16 August)
• CfC: Issue 209 (Tuesday, 16 August)
• CfC: Issue 216 (Tuesday, 16 August)
• Comment about SMIL (Monday, 15 August)
• WCAG Agenda August 16, 2016 (Monday, 15 August)
• Re: CfC: Accessibility Conformance Testing Task Force (Thursday, 11 August)
• Re: CfC: Success Criteria Requirements (Thursday, 11 August)
• Re: CfC: Checklist for Proposals (Thursday, 11 August)
• Re: CfC: Checklist for Proposals (Wednesday, 10 August)
• Re: CfC: Checklist for Proposals (Tuesday, 9 August)
• CfC: Checklist for Proposals (Tuesday, 9 August)
• CfC: Success Criteria Requirements (Tuesday, 9 August)
• CfC: Accessibility Conformance Testing Task Force (Tuesday, 9 August)
• Re: template for new SC (Monday, 8 August)
• WCAG Agenda August 9, 2016 (Sunday, 7 August)
• Volunteers needed for 3 comments (Sunday, 7 August)
• Re: Acceptance Criteria for proposals for new Success Criteria (Wednesday, 3 August)
• Re: Acceptance Criteria for proposals for new Success Criteria (Wednesday, 3 August)
• Re: Acceptance Criteria for proposals for new Success Criteria (Wednesday, 3 August)
• Re: Success Criteria Best Practice Guidelines (Wednesday, 3 August)
• Re: Success Criteria guidance (Wednesday, 3 August)
• Re: Success Criteria guidance (Wednesday, 3 August)
• Re: Success Criteria Best Practice Guidelines (Wednesday, 3 August)
• Re: Success Criteria Best Practice Guidelines (Wednesday, 3 August)
• Re: Success Criteria guidance (Wednesday, 3 August)
• Re: Acceptance Criteria for proposals for new Success Criteria (Wednesday, 3 August)
• Re: Success Criteria Best Practice Guidelines (Tuesday, 2 August)
• Re: Success Criteria guidance (Tuesday, 2 August)
• Acceptance Criteria for proposals for new Success Criteria (Tuesday, 2 August)
• Success Criteria Best Practice Guidelines (Tuesday, 2 August)
• Success Criteria guidance (Tuesday, 2 August)
• WCAG Agenda August 2, 2016 (Monday, 1 August)
• Minutes from July 26 WCAG call (Wednesday, 27 July)
• Communications Survey (Monday, 25 July)
• WCAG Agenda July 26, 2016 - Updated (Monday, 25 July)
• WCAG Agenda July 26, 2016 (Monday, 25 July)
• Re: ‘Functional Performance-like’ SC for WCAG 2.1? (Thursday, 21 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Wednesday, 20 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Wednesday, 20 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Wednesday, 20 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Wednesday, 20 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Wednesday, 20 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Wednesday, 20 July)
• Guidance for TF-submitted Success Criteria (Wednesday, 20 July)
• WCAG Agenda July 19, 2016 (Monday, 18 July)
• WCAG Agenda July 19, 2016 (Monday, 18 July)

Bernard R.M.

• Re: Ethics of user testing and people with cognitive disabilities (Wednesday, 13 July)
• Re: User testing with person with Cognitive disability (Sunday, 10 July)

Bradley Montgomery, Rachael L.

• RE: To publish updated WCAG 2.0 Understanding and Techniques docs (Thursday, 1 September)
• Minutes 19 July 2016 (Tuesday, 19 July)

Charu D Pandhi

• RE: Question: testing for non-unique id values SC 4.1.1 (Thursday, 29 September)

Christophe Strobbe

• Re: Failures Definition (Problem?) (Thursday, 22 September)

David MacDonald

• Re: Question: testing for non-unique id values SC 4.1.1 (Thursday, 29 September)
• Re: Question: testing for non-unique id values SC 4.1.1 (Thursday, 29 September)
• Re: Question: testing for non-unique id values SC 4.1.1 (Thursday, 29 September)
• Re: WCAG Agenda September 13th, 2016 (Friday, 9 September)
• Re: Should we talk about an icon for transcripts in WCAG 2.1? (Wednesday, 7 September)
• Should we talk about an icon for transcripts in WCAG 2.1? (Wednesday, 7 September)
• Re: CfC: Issue 215 (Thursday, 18 August)
• Minutes for WCAG call Aug 9, 2016 (Tuesday, 9 August)
• Re: Success Criteria Best Practice Guidelines (Tuesday, 2 August)
• Re: Color Contrast and Transparency | WCAG 2.1 (Friday, 29 July)
• Re: Color Contrast and Transparency | WCAG 2.1 (Thursday, 28 July)
• Re: Parallax and vestibular disorders (Wednesday, 27 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Friday, 22 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Friday, 22 July)
• Revise reference to "PDA" in example of Keyboard interface (Friday, 22 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Friday, 22 July)
• Re: Do we want a Biometric Alternative SC in WCAG 2.1? (Friday, 22 July)
• Re: Do we want a Biometric Alternative SC in WCAG 2.1? (Thursday, 21 July)
• Re: ‘Functional Performance-like’ SC for WCAG 2.1? (Thursday, 21 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? - Techniques Discussion (Thursday, 21 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? - Techniques Discussion (Thursday, 21 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? - Techniques Discussion (Thursday, 21 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Wednesday, 20 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Wednesday, 20 July)
• FW: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Wednesday, 20 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Wednesday, 20 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Wednesday, 20 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Wednesday, 20 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Wednesday, 20 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Wednesday, 20 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Wednesday, 20 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Wednesday, 20 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• Re: Re[2]: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• Re: Re[2]: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• Re: Re[2]: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• Re: Numbering Scheme for WCAG 2.1 (Tuesday, 19 July)
• Re: Should WCAG2.1 provide requirements or guidance on buttons vs. links? (Monday, 18 July)
• Re: Should we drop any WCAG 2 SCs in 2.1? (Monday, 18 July)
• Re: Should WCAG2.1 provide requirements or guidance on buttons vs. links? (Monday, 18 July)
• Re: Should we drop any WCAG 2 SCs in 2.1? (Monday, 18 July)
• Re: Re[2]: Automated A11y non-issues and SC Parsing 4.1.1 (Monday, 18 July)
• Re: Re[2]: Automated A11y non-issues and SC Parsing 4.1.1 (Monday, 18 July)
• Re: Re[2]: Automated A11y non-issues and SC Parsing 4.1.1 (Monday, 18 July)
• Re: New SC: Meaningful element name (Friday, 15 July)
• Re: New SC: Avoid disrupting working accessibility features (Friday, 15 July)
• Re: Should we drop any WCAG 2 SCs in 2.1? (Thursday, 14 July)
• Re: Should we drop any WCAG 2 SCs in 2.1? (Thursday, 14 July)
• Should we drop any WCAG 2 SCs in 2.1? (Thursday, 14 July)
• Re: Should WCAG2.1 provide requirements or guidance on buttons vs. links? (Thursday, 14 July)
• Re: Should WCAG2.1 provide requirements or guidance on buttons vs. links? (Wednesday, 13 July)
• Re: proposed success criteria (Wednesday, 13 July)
• Should WCAG2.1 provide requirements or guidance on buttons vs. links? (Wednesday, 13 July)
• Re: 1.4.2 audio control, do we want to require the stop mechanism to be more discoverable? (Wednesday, 13 July)
• Re: 1.4.2 audio control, do we want to require the stop mechanism to be more discoverable? (Tuesday, 12 July)
• Re: 1.4.2 audio control, do we want to require the stop mechanism to be more discoverable? (Tuesday, 12 July)
• Re: Ethics of user testing and people with cognitive disabilities (Tuesday, 12 July)
• Re: Ethics of user testing and people with cognitive disabilities (Tuesday, 12 July)
• Re: 1.4.2 audio control, do we want to require the stop mechanism to be more discoverable? (Tuesday, 12 July)
• Re: [w3c/wcag] Technique G183 not applicable to touch/inputs that lack hover/focus (#201) (Tuesday, 12 July)
• Re: 1.4.2 audio control, do we want to require the stop mechanism to be more discoverable? (Monday, 11 July)
• 1.4.2 audio control, do we want to require the stop mechanism to be more discoverable? (Monday, 11 July)
• Re: Should 2.4.4 require Link text or ACCNAME, rather than enclosing sentence etc... (Monday, 11 July)
• Re: Ethics of user testing and people with cognitive disabilities (Monday, 11 July)
• Re: User testing with person with Cognitive disability (Sunday, 10 July)
• Re: triplicate mails to same list (was Re: User testing with user with cognitive disability) (Sunday, 10 July)
• User testing with user with cognitive disability (Sunday, 10 July)
• User testing with person with Cognitive disability (Sunday, 10 July)
• test with a user who had a cognitive disability (Sunday, 10 July)
• Re: University of Illinois automated tool WCAG failures (Friday, 8 July)
• Re: University of Illinois automated tool WCAG failures (Friday, 8 July)
• Re: University of Illinois automated tool WCAG failures (Thursday, 7 July)
• University of Illinois automated tool WCAG failures (Wednesday, 6 July)
• Re: 1100% may be physically impossible and still not achieve the results on smaller monitors (Wednesday, 6 July)
• Re: Should 2.4.4 require Link text or ACCNAME, rather than enclosing sentence etc... (Wednesday, 6 July)
• Should 2.4.4 require Link text or ACCNAME, rather than enclosing sentence etc... (Wednesday, 6 July)
• Should SC 2.4.4 require Link text or Accessible Name, rather than enclosing sentence etc.? (Wednesday, 6 July)
• Re: 1100% may be physically impossible and still not achieve the results on smaller monitors (Wednesday, 6 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Wednesday, 6 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• Responsive sites dropping content (Monday, 4 July)
• Re: Conforming alternative for mobile should not be Desktop (Friday, 1 July)
• Re: Conforming alternative for mobile should not be Desktop (Friday, 1 July)
• Re: Conforming alternative for mobile should not be Desktop (Friday, 1 July)

David Sloan

• Re: Ethics of user testing and people with cognitive disabilities (Tuesday, 12 July)
• Re: Ethics of user testing and people with cognitive disabilities (Monday, 11 July)

Detlev Fischer

• Re: Color Contrast and Transparency | WCAG 2.1 (Friday, 29 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Friday, 8 July)

EA Draffan

• RE: Success Criteria guidance (Wednesday, 3 August)
• RE: Ethics of user testing and people with cognitive disabilities (Tuesday, 12 July)

Eric Eggert

• Re: Parallax and vestibular disorders (Thursday, 4 August)
• Re: Color Contrast and Transparency | WCAG 2.1 (Thursday, 28 July)
• [FYI] Quickref bugfix update (Thursday, 21 July)
• Re: Should WCAG2.1 provide requirements or guidance on buttons vs. links? (Wednesday, 13 July)

Greg Lowney

• Re: feedback loops (Wednesday, 31 August)
• Re: WCAG Agenda August 23, 2016 (Tuesday, 23 August)
• Re: Success Criteria guidance (Friday, 5 August)

Gregg Vanderheiden

• Re: Question: testing for non-unique id values SC 4.1.1 (Thursday, 29 September)
• Re: Should we talk about an icon for transcripts in WCAG 2.1? (Wednesday, 7 September)
• Re: Clarification of SC 1.2.3 (Wednesday, 10 August)
• Re: CfC: Checklist for Proposals (Tuesday, 9 August)
• Re: What should we do with a long success criteria? (Monday, 8 August)
• Re: Success Criteria Best Practice Guidelines (Wednesday, 3 August)
• Re: Success Criteria Best Practice Guidelines (Tuesday, 2 August)
• Re: Acceptance Criteria for proposals for new Success Criteria (Tuesday, 2 August)
• Re: Success Criteria guidance (Tuesday, 2 August)
• Re: Parallax and vestibular disorders (Sunday, 31 July)
• Re: Just to clarify: 2.1 is extension, Silver is Rewrite? (Friday, 22 July)
• Re: Do we want a Biometric Alternative SC in WCAG 2.1? (Friday, 22 July)
• Re: ‘Functional Performance-like’ SC for WCAG 2.1? (Thursday, 21 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Thursday, 21 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? - Techniques Discussion (Thursday, 21 July)
• Re: Should we drop any WCAG 2 SCs in 2.1? (Wednesday, 20 July)
• Re: Guidance for TF-submitted Success Criteria (Wednesday, 20 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• Re: Should WCAG2.1 provide requirements or guidance on buttons vs. links? (Monday, 18 July)
• Re: Responsive tables and accessibility (Tuesday, 12 July)
• Re: Responsive tables and accessibility (Tuesday, 12 July)
• Re: 1100% may be physically impossible and still not achieve the results on smaller monitors (Monday, 11 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Thursday, 7 July)
• Re: University of Illinois automated tool WCAG failures (Wednesday, 6 July)
• Re: 1100% may be physically impossible and still not achieve the results on smaller monitors (Wednesday, 6 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Tuesday, 5 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)

Gregg Vanderheiden RTF

• Re: Do we want a Biometric Alternative SC in WCAG 2.1? (Friday, 22 July)
• Re: Do we want a Biometric Alternative SC in WCAG 2.1? (Friday, 22 July)
• Re: Should we drop any WCAG 2 SCs in 2.1? (Thursday, 21 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Tuesday, 5 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)

James Nurthen

• Re: Second screen API and working group (Wednesday, 28 September)
• Re: Adding a resource to Understanding 2.4.2 (Tuesday, 27 September)
• Re: 1.4.2 audio control, do we want to require the stop mechanism to be more discoverable? (Monday, 11 July)
• Re: Should 2.4.4 require Link text or ACCNAME, rather than enclosing sentence etc... (Wednesday, 6 July)

Janina Sajka

• Re: Color Contrast and Transparency | WCAG 2.1 (Thursday, 28 July)

Jeanne Spellman

• Minutes of WCAG F2F of 20 September 2016 (Tuesday, 20 September)
• Minutes of Silver sub-group teleconference of 16 September (Friday, 16 September)
• Minutes of the Silver sub-group teleconference of 13 September 2016 (Tuesday, 13 September)
• Report from Silver sub-group on the Options for Designing Silver (Tuesday, 13 September)
• Minutes of the SIlver Sub-group meeting of 9 September (Friday, 9 September)
• Minutes of the Silver Sub-Group teleconference of 6 September (Tuesday, 6 September)
• Minutes of the Silver sub-group of 2 September 2016 (Friday, 2 September)
• Re: CfC: To publish updated WCAG 2.0 Understanding and Techniques docs (Tuesday, 30 August)
• Minutes of Silver Sub-group teleconference of 30 August 2016 (Tuesday, 30 August)
• Re: Silver Design Process goals survey (Tuesday, 30 August)
• Re: Silver Design Process goals survey (Monday, 29 August)
• Minutes of the Silver Subgroup meeting of 23 August 2016 (Tuesday, 23 August)
• Silver Design Process goals survey (Monday, 22 August)
• Minutes of the Silver Subgroup meeting of 19 August 2016 (Friday, 19 August)
• Minutes of Silver subgroup meeting of 16 August 2016 (Tuesday, 16 August)
• Silver Subgroup minutes of 29 July 2016 (Friday, 29 July)
• Minutes of Silver Subgroup meeting 26 July 2016 (Tuesday, 26 July)
• Silver Subgroup update and minutes of 21 July 2015 teleconference (Thursday, 21 July)
• Re: WCAG Agenda July 19, 2016 (Tuesday, 19 July)

John Foliot

• Re: Failures Definition (Problem?) (Thursday, 22 September)
• Re: Failures Definition (Problem?) (Thursday, 22 September)
• Failures Definition (Problem?) (Thursday, 22 September)
• Re: WCAG Agenda September 13th, 2016 (Friday, 9 September)
• Re: Should we talk about an icon for transcripts in WCAG 2.1? (Wednesday, 7 September)
• Re: feedback loops (Wednesday, 31 August)
• Re: CfC: Issue 207 (Wednesday, 24 August)
• Re: CfC: Updates to H28 resources (Wednesday, 24 August)
• Re: CfC: H64 & H70 `frame` is obsoleted by HTML5 (Wednesday, 24 August)
• Re: CfC: H73 `summary` is obsoleted by HTML5 (Wednesday, 24 August)
• Re: CfC: Ruby changes (Wednesday, 24 August)
• Re: CfC: Consider SMIL (Wednesday, 24 August)
• Re: WCAG Agenda August 23, 2016 (Tuesday, 23 August)
• Re: Volunteers needed for 3 comments (Monday, 8 August)
• Color Contrast and Transparency | WCAG 2.1 (Thursday, 28 July)
• Re: Do we want a Biometric Alternative SC in WCAG 2.1? (Friday, 22 July)
• RE: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• RE: Re[2]: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• Re: Re[2]: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• Re: Re[2]: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• Re: Re[2]: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• RE: Re[2]: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• Numbering Scheme for WCAG 2.1 (Monday, 18 July)
• RE: Should we drop any WCAG 2 SCs in 2.1? (Monday, 18 July)
• Re: Should WCAG2.1 provide requirements or guidance on buttons vs. links? (Monday, 18 July)
• Re: Re[4]: Should we drop any WCAG 2 SCs in 2.1? (Friday, 15 July)
• Re: Should WCAG explicitly talk about *mainstream* assistive technologies? (Friday, 15 July)
• RE: Should we drop any WCAG 2 SCs in 2.1? (Thursday, 14 July)
• Re: Should we drop any WCAG 2 SCs in 2.1? (Thursday, 14 July)
• Re: 1.4.2 audio control, do we want to require the stop mechanism to be more discoverable? (Tuesday, 12 July)
• Re: 1.4.2 audio control, do we want to require the stop mechanism to be more discoverable? (Monday, 11 July)
• RE: University of Illinois automated tool WCAG failures (Friday, 8 July)
• Re: University of Illinois automated tool WCAG failures (Friday, 8 July)
• Re: Should 2.4.4 require Link text or ACCNAME, rather than enclosing sentence etc... (Wednesday, 6 July)

john.foliot

• RE: Question: testing for non-unique id values SC 4.1.1 (Friday, 30 September)
• RE: Second screen API and working group (Wednesday, 28 September)
• Re: DRM protest timed with TPAC 2016 (Saturday, 17 September)
• RE: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Wednesday, 20 July)

Jonathan Avila

• RE: Question: testing for non-unique id values SC 4.1.1 (Friday, 30 September)
• RE: Question: testing for non-unique id values SC 4.1.1 (Friday, 30 September)
• RE: Question: testing for non-unique id values SC 4.1.1 (Friday, 30 September)
• RE: Question: testing for non-unique id values SC 4.1.1 (Thursday, 29 September)
• Second screen API and working group (Tuesday, 27 September)
• RE: DRM protest timed with TPAC 2016 (Tuesday, 27 September)
• RE: Failures Definition (Problem?) (Thursday, 22 September)
• RE: Report from Silver sub-group on the Options for Designing Silver (Monday, 19 September)
• RE: DRM protest timed with TPAC 2016 (Friday, 16 September)
• RE: WCAG Agenda September 13th, 2016 (Friday, 9 September)
• Re: WCAG Agenda August 16, 2016 (Monday, 15 August)
• RE: Proposed SC: Unique Titles - or - Unique & Updated Titles (Friday, 12 August)
• RE: Clarification of SC 1.2.3 (Thursday, 11 August)
• RE: Clarification of SC 1.2.3 (Wednesday, 10 August)
• RE: Clarification of SC 1.2.3 (Wednesday, 10 August)
• RE: Clarification of SC 1.2.3 (Wednesday, 10 August)
• RE: Clarification of SC 1.2.3 (Wednesday, 10 August)
• Re: What should we do with a long success criteria? (Monday, 8 August)
• RE: Should we drop any WCAG 2 SCs in 2.1? (Wednesday, 20 July)
• RE: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Wednesday, 20 July)
• RE: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Wednesday, 20 July)
• RE: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• RE: Should WCAG2.1 provide requirements or guidance on buttons vs. links? (Monday, 18 July)
• RE: Should we drop any WCAG 2 SCs in 2.1? (Monday, 18 July)
• RE: Should we drop any WCAG 2 SCs in 2.1? (Monday, 18 July)
• RE: New SC: Avoid disrupting working accessibility features (Monday, 18 July)
• RE: Re[4]: Should we drop any WCAG 2 SCs in 2.1? (Monday, 18 July)
• RE: New SC: Avoid disrupting working accessibility features (Monday, 18 July)
• RE: Re[2]: Automated A11y non-issues and SC Parsing 4.1.1 (Monday, 18 July)
• RE: New SC: Meaningful element name (Monday, 18 July)
• RE: Automated A11y non-issues and SC Parsing 4.1.1 (Monday, 18 July)
• RE: Responsive tables and accessibility (Wednesday, 13 July)
• RE: 1.4.2 audio control, do we want to require the stop mechanism to be more discoverable? (Tuesday, 12 July)
• RE: 1.4.2 audio control, do we want to require the stop mechanism to be more discoverable? (Tuesday, 12 July)
• RE: Responsive tables and accessibility (Tuesday, 12 July)
• RE: Responsive tables and accessibility (Tuesday, 12 July)
• Responsive tables and accessibility (Tuesday, 12 July)
• RE: Should 2.4.4 require Link text or ACCNAME, rather than enclosing sentence etc... (Monday, 11 July)
• RE: Should 2.4.4 require Link text or ACCNAME, rather than enclosing sentence etc... (Monday, 11 July)
• RE: 1100% may be physically impossible and still not achieve the results on smaller monitors (Monday, 11 July)
• RE: Should 2.4.4 require Link text or ACCNAME, rather than enclosing sentence etc... (Monday, 11 July)
• RE: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Tuesday, 5 July)
• RE: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• RE: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• RE: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)

josh@interaccess.ie

• WCAG Agenda Sept 27th, 2016 (Friday, 23 September)
• Re: Missing scribing notes (Tuesday, 20 September)
• Re: Discussion materials for TPAC (Sunday, 18 September)
• WCAG Agenda September 13th, 2016 (Friday, 9 September)
• COGA Feedback page (Monday, 5 September)
• No WCAG meeting Tues 6th Sept 2016 (Monday, 5 September)
• Re: WCAG Agenda August 23, 2016 (Monday, 22 August)
• Re[2]: Comment about SMIL (Monday, 22 August)
• Re: Comment about SMIL (Saturday, 20 August)
• Re[2]: Checklist for Proposals (Monday, 15 August)
• Re[3]: What should we do with a long success criteria? (Monday, 15 August)
• Re[2]: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• Re[2]: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• Re[4]: Automated A11y non-issues and SC Parsing 4.1.1 (Monday, 18 July)
• Re[4]: Automated A11y non-issues and SC Parsing 4.1.1 (Monday, 18 July)
• Re[2]: Automated A11y non-issues and SC Parsing 4.1.1 (Monday, 18 July)
• Re[2]: Automated A11y non-issues and SC Parsing 4.1.1 (Monday, 18 July)
• Re[4]: Should we drop any WCAG 2 SCs in 2.1? (Friday, 15 July)
• Re[2]: Should we drop any WCAG 2 SCs in 2.1? (Friday, 15 July)
• Re: Should we drop any WCAG 2 SCs in 2.1? (Friday, 15 July)
• Ethics of user testing and people with cognitive disabilities (Monday, 11 July)
• WCAG Agenda July 12th 2016 (Friday, 8 July)
• Re[2]: User agent SCs? (Wednesday, 6 July)
• Re[2]: User agent SCs? (Wednesday, 6 July)
• Re: User agent SCs? (Wednesday, 6 July)
• WCAG Agenda July 5th 2016 (Friday, 1 July)

Joshue O Connor

• Re: DRM protest timed with TPAC 2016 (Saturday, 17 September)
• Re: Fwd: DRM protest timed with TPAC 2016 (Saturday, 17 September)
• Re: feedback loops (Thursday, 1 September)
• CfC: To publish updated WCAG 2.0 Understanding and Techniques docs (Tuesday, 30 August)
• Re: WCAG Agenda August 23, 2016 (Monday, 22 August)
• Re: WCAG Agenda August 23, 2016 (Monday, 22 August)
• Re: WCAG Agenda August 23, 2016 (Monday, 22 August)
• WCAG Agenda August 23, 2016 (Sunday, 21 August)
• RE: Re[2]: Checklist for Proposals (Monday, 15 August)
• Re: Automated A11y non-issues and SC Parsing 4.1.1 (Monday, 18 July)
• Automated A11y non-issues and SC Parsing 4.1.1 (Monday, 18 July)

Kathy Wahlbin

• RE: WCAG Agenda July 26, 2016 - Updated (Monday, 25 July)

Katie Haritos-Shea

• Re: Acceptance Criteria for proposals for new Success Criteria (Tuesday, 2 August)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? - Techniques Discussion (Thursday, 21 July)
• RE: Re[2]: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? - NEW Should we leverage AAPIs? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• Re: Re[2]: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• Re: Re[2]: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• Re: Should we drop any WCAG 2 SCs in 2.1? (Tuesday, 19 July)

Katie Haritos-Shea GMAIL

• RE: Question: testing for non-unique id values SC 4.1.1 - Suggested New 4.1.1-ish SC (Friday, 30 September)
• RE: Question: testing for non-unique id values SC 4.1.1 (Thursday, 29 September)
• RE: Question: testing for non-unique id values SC 4.1.1 (Thursday, 29 September)
• RE: Second screen API and working group (Wednesday, 28 September)
• RE: Failures Definition (Problem?) (Thursday, 22 September)
• RE: Should we talk about an icon for transcripts in WCAG 2.1? (Wednesday, 7 September)
• RE: Should we talk about an icon for transcripts in WCAG 2.1? (Wednesday, 7 September)
• RE: To publish updated WCAG 2.0 Understanding and Techniques docs (Tuesday, 30 August)
• RE: Updates to H28 resources (Wednesday, 24 August)
• RE: H64 & H70 `frame` is obsoleted by HTML5 (Wednesday, 24 August)
• RE: H73 `summary` is obsoleted by HTML5 (Wednesday, 24 August)
• RE: Consider SMIL (Wednesday, 24 August)
• RE: Issue 207 (Wednesday, 24 August)
• RE: Issue 215 (Tuesday, 16 August)
• RE: Issue 220 (Tuesday, 16 August)
• RE: Issue 209 (Tuesday, 16 August)
• RE: Issue 216 (Tuesday, 16 August)
• RE: Proposed SC: Unique Titles - or - Unique & Updated Titles (Friday, 12 August)
• RE: Proposed SC: Unique Titles - or - Unique & Updated Titles (Thursday, 11 August)
• Proposed SC: Unique Titles - or - Unique & Updated Titles (Thursday, 11 August)
• RE: Clarification of SC 1.2.3 (Wednesday, 10 August)
• RE: Clarification of SC 1.2.3 (Wednesday, 10 August)
• RE: Clarification of SC 1.2.3 (Wednesday, 10 August)
• RE: Clarification of SC 1.2.3 (Wednesday, 10 August)
• RE: Clarification of SC 1.2.3 (Wednesday, 10 August)
• RE: Checklist for Proposals (Tuesday, 9 August)
• RE: Accessibility Conformance Testing Task Force (Tuesday, 9 August)
• RE: Success Criteria Requirements (Tuesday, 9 August)
• RE: Acceptance Criteria for proposals for new Success Criteria (Wednesday, 3 August)
• RE: Color Contrast and Transparency | WCAG 2.1 (Friday, 29 July)
• RE: Parallax and vestibular disorders (Wednesday, 27 July)
• RE: Do we want a Biometric Alternative SC in WCAG 2.1? (Friday, 22 July)
• RE: Do we want a Biometric Alternative SC in WCAG 2.1? (Friday, 22 July)
• RE: Do we want a Biometric Alternative SC in WCAG 2.1? (Friday, 22 July)
• RE: Do we want a Biometric Alternative SC in WCAG 2.1? (Thursday, 21 July)
• Do we want a Biometric Alternative SC in WCAG 2.1? (Thursday, 21 July)
• RE: ‘Functional Performance-like’ SC for WCAG 2.1? (Thursday, 21 July)
• RE: ‘Functional Performance-like’ SC for WCAG 2.1? (Thursday, 21 July)
• ‘Functional Performance-like’ SC for WCAG 2.1? (Thursday, 21 July)
• RE: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? - Techniques Discussion (Thursday, 21 July)
• RE: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? - Techniques Discussion (Thursday, 21 July)
• RE: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? - Techniques Discussion (Wednesday, 20 July)
• RE: Guidance for TF-submitted Success Criteria (Wednesday, 20 July)
• RE: Re[2]: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• Possible Lisbon 2017 TPAC Hotels (Tuesday, 19 July)
• RE: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• RE: 1.4.2 audio control, do we want to require the stop mechanism to be more discoverable? (Tuesday, 12 July)
• RE: 1.4.2 audio control, do we want to require the stop mechanism to be more discoverable? (Tuesday, 12 July)
• RE: 1.4.2 audio control, do we want to require the stop mechanism to be more discoverable? (Tuesday, 12 July)
• RE: [w3c/wcag] Technique G183 not applicable to touch/inputs that lack hover/focus (#201) (Tuesday, 12 July)
• RE: 1.4.2 audio control, do we want to require the stop mechanism to be more discoverable? (Monday, 11 July)
• RE: University of Illinois automated tool WCAG failures (Friday, 8 July)
• RE: University of Illinois automated tool WCAG failures (Friday, 8 July)

Kepeng Li

• Discussion materials for TPAC (Sunday, 18 September)

kimberlee.dirks@thomsonreuters.com

• RE: ‘Functional Performance-like’ SC for WCAG 2.1? (Thursday, 21 July)

Kurt Mattes

• Re: Failures Definition (Problem?) (Thursday, 22 September)
• Re: Should WCAG explicitly talk about *mainstream* assistive technologies? (Friday, 15 July)

Laura Carlson

• WCAG WG Meeting September 27, 2017 (Tuesday, 27 September)
• Re: CfC: Checklist for Proposals (Wednesday, 10 August)
• Re: CfC: Accessibility Conformance Testing Task Force (Wednesday, 10 August)
• Re: CfC: Success Criteria Requirements (Wednesday, 10 August)
• Re: WCAG Agenda August 9, 2016 (Monday, 8 August)
• Re: WCAG Agenda August 9, 2016 (Monday, 8 August)
• Re: Parallax and vestibular disorders (Thursday, 4 August)
• Re: Parallax and vestibular disorders (Wednesday, 3 August)
• Re: Parallax and vestibular disorders (Thursday, 28 July)
• Re: Parallax and vestibular disorders (Wednesday, 27 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• Re: 1.4.2 audio control, do we want to require the stop mechanism to be more discoverable? (Tuesday, 12 July)
• Re: 1100% may be physically impossible and still not achieve the results on smaller monitors (Wednesday, 6 July)
• Re: User agent SCs? (Wednesday, 6 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Tuesday, 5 July)
• WCAG WG Meeting Minutes July 5, 2016 (Tuesday, 5 July)

lisa.seeman

• Re: feedback loops (Wednesday, 31 August)
• Re: Re: What should we do with a long success criteria? (Tuesday, 9 August)
• Fwd: Re: Acceptance Criteria for proposals for new Success Criteria (Monday, 8 August)
• Fwd: template for new SC (Monday, 8 August)
• Re: Acceptance Criteria for proposals for new Success Criteria (Monday, 8 August)
• template for new SC (Monday, 8 August)
• What should we do with a long success criteria? (Monday, 8 August)
• Re: Success Criteria Best Practice Guidelines (Thursday, 4 August)
• Re: Acceptance Criteria for proposals for new Success Criteria (Thursday, 4 August)
• RE: Acceptance Criteria for proposals for new Success Criteria (Thursday, 4 August)
• Re: Success Criteria Best Practice Guidelines (Wednesday, 3 August)
• Re: Success Criteria Best Practice Guidelines (Wednesday, 3 August)
• Re: Success Criteria Best Practice Guidelines (Wednesday, 3 August)
• Re: Success Criteria guidance (Wednesday, 3 August)
• Re: Acceptance Criteria for proposals for new Success Criteria (Wednesday, 3 August)
• Re: Success Criteria Best Practice Guidelines (Wednesday, 3 August)
• RE: Do we want a Biometric Alternative SC in WCAG 2.1? (Sunday, 24 July)
• proposed success criteria (Wednesday, 13 July)
• Re: Ethics of user testing and people with cognitive disabilities (Monday, 11 July)
• Re: User testing with person with Cognitive disability (Sunday, 10 July)
• Re: User testing with user with cognitive disability (Sunday, 10 July)
• Re: Fwd: Should 2.4.4 require Link text or ACCNAME, rather than enclosing sentence etc... (Thursday, 7 July)

Léonie Watson

• Re: Failures Definition (Problem?) (Thursday, 22 September)
• Re: Do we want a Biometric Alternative SC in WCAG 2.1? (Friday, 22 July)
• Replying to Github issues by email (Tuesday, 12 July)
• Re: 1100% may be physically impossible and still not achieve the results on smaller monitors (Wednesday, 6 July)

Makoto UEKI - Infoaxia, Inc.

• Re: WCAG Agenda September 13th, 2016 (Tuesday, 13 September)
• Re: WCAG Agenda August 30, 2016 (Tuesday, 30 August)
• Re: WCAG Agenda August 23, 2016 (Tuesday, 23 August)

Marc Johlic

• Re: WCAG MINUTES August 30, 2016 (Tuesday, 30 August)
• Re: WCAG Agenda August 2, 2016 (Tuesday, 2 August)

Michael Cooper

• Fwd: DRM protest timed with TPAC 2016 (Friday, 16 September)
• Fwd: [TPAC 2016] reminder about airport transfers (Friday, 16 September)
• WCAG Agenda August 9, 2016 (Sunday, 7 August)
• Re: Ethics of user testing and people with cognitive disabilities (Tuesday, 12 July)

Mike Elledge

• Re: WCAG Agenda Sept 27th, 2016 (Monday, 26 September)
• Re: Silver Design Process goals survey (Monday, 29 August)
• Minutes for WCAG Call August 23, 2016 (Tuesday, 23 August)
• Re: Clarification of SC 1.2.3 (Wednesday, 10 August)
• Re: Clarification of SC 1.2.3 (Wednesday, 10 August)
• Clarification of SC 1.2.3 (Wednesday, 10 August)
• Examples of Unexpected Changes from Focus and Form Input? (Thursday, 4 August)
• Re: Success Criteria guidance (Tuesday, 2 August)
• Re: Parallax and vestibular disorders (Thursday, 28 July)
• Re: WCAG Agenda July 19, 2016 (Monday, 18 July)
• Re: 1.4.2 audio control, do we want to require the stop mechanism to be more discoverable? (Tuesday, 12 July)
• Re: 1.4.2 audio control, do we want to require the stop mechanism to be more discoverable? (Tuesday, 12 July)
• Regrets for tomorrow's meeting (Monday, 4 July)

Patrick H. Lauke

• Re: WCAG MINUTES August 30, 2016 (Wednesday, 31 August)
• Re: Parallax and vestibular disorders (Thursday, 4 August)
• Re: Color Contrast and Transparency | WCAG 2.1 (Friday, 29 July)
• Re: Revise reference to "PDA" in example of Keyboard interface (Friday, 22 July)
• Re: Do we want a Biometric Alternative SC in WCAG 2.1? (Friday, 22 July)
• Re: Do we want a Biometric Alternative SC in WCAG 2.1? (Friday, 22 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Thursday, 21 July)
• Re: Should we drop any WCAG 2 SCs in 2.1? (Thursday, 21 July)
• Re: Should we drop any WCAG 2 SCs in 2.1? (Wednesday, 20 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• Re: New SC: Avoid disrupting working accessibility features (Monday, 18 July)
• Re: Automated A11y non-issues and SC Parsing 4.1.1 (Monday, 18 July)
• Re: Automated A11y non-issues and SC Parsing 4.1.1 (Monday, 18 July)
• Re: Automated A11y non-issues and SC Parsing 4.1.1 (Monday, 18 July)
• Re: New SC: Meaningful element name (Monday, 18 July)
• Re: New SC: Avoid disrupting working accessibility features (Friday, 15 July)
• Re: New SC: Avoid disrupting working accessibility features (Friday, 15 July)
• Re: New SC: Meaningful element name (Friday, 15 July)
• Re: Should WCAG explicitly talk about *mainstream* assistive technologies? (Friday, 15 July)
• Should WCAG explicitly talk about *mainstream* assistive technologies? (Friday, 15 July)
• Re: Should we drop any WCAG 2 SCs in 2.1? (Thursday, 14 July)
• Re: 1.4.2 audio control, do we want to require the stop mechanism to be more discoverable? (Tuesday, 12 July)
• Re: 1100% may be physically impossible and still not achieve the results on smaller monitors (Tuesday, 12 July)
• Technique G183 not applicable to touch/inputs that lack hover/focus (Monday, 11 July)
• triplicate mails to same list (was Re: User testing with user with cognitive disability) (Sunday, 10 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Friday, 8 July)
• Re: Should SC 2.4.4 require Link text or Accessible Name, rather than enclosing sentence etc.? (Wednesday, 6 July)
• Re: User agent SCs? (Wednesday, 6 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)

r12a

• Re: Fw: means a lot to me (Tuesday, 13 September)

Rochford, John

• RE: Ethics of user testing and people with cognitive disabilities (Monday, 11 July)

Sailesh Panchang

• Re: Question: testing for non-unique id values SC 4.1.1 (Friday, 30 September)
• Re: Question: testing for non-unique id values SC 4.1.1 (Thursday, 29 September)
• Question: testing for non-unique id values SC 4.1.1 (Thursday, 29 September)
• Re: CfC: Checklist for Proposals (Wednesday, 10 August)
• Re: CfC: Checklist for Proposals (Wednesday, 10 August)
• Re: Acceptance Criteria for proposals for new Success Criteria (Tuesday, 9 August)
• Re: Acceptance Criteria for proposals for new Success Criteria (Tuesday, 9 August)
• (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"?  (Saturday, 23 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Friday, 22 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Friday, 22 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Friday, 22 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Thursday, 21 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Thursday, 21 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• Re: New SC: Avoid disrupting working accessibility features (Tuesday, 19 July)
• Re: New SC: Avoid disrupting working accessibility features (Monday, 18 July)
• Re: New SC: Avoid disrupting working accessibility features (Monday, 18 July)
• Re: New SC: Meaningful element name (Monday, 18 July)
• Re: Re[2]: Automated A11y non-issues and SC Parsing 4.1.1 (Monday, 18 July)
• Re: Automated A11y non-issues and SC Parsing 4.1.1 (Monday, 18 July)
• Re: New SC: Meaningful element name (Monday, 18 July)
• Re: New SC: Avoid disrupting working accessibility features (Friday, 15 July)
• Re: New SC: Avoid disrupting working accessibility features (Friday, 15 July)
• New SC: Avoid disrupting working accessibility features (Friday, 15 July)
• New SC: Meaningful element name (Friday, 15 July)
• Re: Re[4]: Should we drop any WCAG 2 SCs in 2.1? (Friday, 15 July)
• Re: Responsive tables and accessibility (Wednesday, 13 July)
• Re: Conforming alternative for mobile should not be Desktop (Tuesday, 12 July)

Sarah Horton

• Re: Report from Silver sub-group on the Options for Designing Silver (Monday, 19 September)
• Re: Report from Silver sub-group on the Options for Designing Silver (Monday, 19 September)
• Re: WCAG Agenda September 13th, 2016 (Monday, 12 September)
• Minutes of the Silver Subgroup Teleconference of 26 August 2016 (Friday, 26 August)
• Re: WCAG Agenda August 23, 2016 (Tuesday, 23 August)
• Re: WCAG Agenda August 2, 2016 (Tuesday, 2 August)
• Re: WCAG Agenda July 26, 2016 - Updated (Monday, 25 July)

Shadi Abou-Zahra

• **correction** [Minutes] WCAG Accessibility Conformance Testing (ACT) Task Force - Meeting on 28 September 2016 (Thursday, 29 September)
• [Minutes] WCAG Accessibility Conformance Testing (ACT) Task Force - Meeting on 28 September 2016 (Wednesday, 28 September)
• [Minutes] WCAG Accessibility Conformance Testing (ACT) Task Force - Meeting on 8 September 2016 (Friday, 9 September)

Shawn Lauriat

• Re: WCAG Agenda August 16, 2016 (Monday, 15 August)
• Re: WCAG Agenda August 9, 2016 (Monday, 8 August)
• Re: Possible Lisbon 2017 TPAC Hotels (Tuesday, 19 July)

Steve Faulkner

• Re: Question: testing for non-unique id values SC 4.1.1 (Thursday, 29 September)
• Re: Responsive tables and accessibility (Tuesday, 12 July)
• Re: User agent SCs? (Wednesday, 6 July)
• Re: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)

Thad C

• Re: Parallax and vestibular disorders (Wednesday, 27 July)
• Re: proposed success criteria (Wednesday, 13 July)

Vivienne Conway

• RE: [Minutes] WCAG Accessibility Conformance Testing (ACT) Task Force - Meeting on 28 September 2016 (Thursday, 29 September)

Wayne Dick

• Re: Should we talk about an icon for transcripts in WCAG 2.1? (Wednesday, 7 September)
• Re: CfC: Issue 215 (Thursday, 18 August)
• Re: Volunteers needed for 3 comments (Tuesday, 9 August)
• Re: WCAG Agenda August 9, 2016 (Tuesday, 9 August)
• Minutes for WCAG WG 8/2 (Tuesday, 2 August)
• Re: Parallax and vestibular disorders (Saturday, 30 July)
• Re: Parallax and vestibular disorders (Thursday, 28 July)
• Just to clarify: 2.1 is extension, Silver is Rewrite? (Friday, 22 July)
• Re: Re[2]: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• Re: Should we drop any WCAG 2 SCs in 2.1? (Monday, 18 July)
• Re: 1100% may be physically impossible and still not achieve the results on smaller monitors (Tuesday, 12 July)

Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Issue Tracker

• WCAG-ACTION-330: Move 2.1 requirements from w3c/wcag/ (wcag21 branch) to w3c/wcag21/ (Thursday, 25 August)
• WCAG-ACTION-329: And awk to work out a way to deal with definition changes. (Tuesday, 5 July)
• WCAG-ACTION-328: Discuss need for definition changes in wcag at editors meet. (Tuesday, 5 July)

White, Jason J

• RE: Question: testing for non-unique id values SC 4.1.1 (Friday, 30 September)
• RE: Question: testing for non-unique id values SC 4.1.1 (Thursday, 29 September)
• RE: Should we talk about an icon for transcripts in WCAG 2.1? (Wednesday, 7 September)
• RE: CfC: To publish updated WCAG 2.0 Understanding and Techniques docs (Tuesday, 30 August)
• Techniques CFCs (Wednesday, 24 August)
• RE: Comment about SMIL (Saturday, 20 August)
• RE: Re[3]: What should we do with a long success criteria? (Monday, 15 August)
• RE: Re[2]: Checklist for Proposals (Monday, 15 August)
• RE: Proposed SC: Unique Titles - or - Unique & Updated Titles (Friday, 12 August)
• RE: Proposed SC: Unique Titles - or - Unique & Updated Titles (Thursday, 11 August)
• RE: Proposed SC: Unique Titles - or - Unique & Updated Titles (Thursday, 11 August)
• RE: Proposed SC: Unique Titles - or - Unique & Updated Titles (Thursday, 11 August)
• RE: Clarification of SC 1.2.3 (Wednesday, 10 August)
• RE: Clarification of SC 1.2.3 (Wednesday, 10 August)
• RE: Checklist for Proposals (Wednesday, 10 August)
• RE: Success Criteria Requirements (Wednesday, 10 August)
• RE: CfC: Accessibility Conformance Testing Task Force (Wednesday, 10 August)
• RE: Acceptance Criteria for proposals for new Success Criteria (Tuesday, 9 August)
• RE: Acceptance Criteria for proposals for new Success Criteria (Wednesday, 3 August)
• RE: Acceptance Criteria for proposals for new Success Criteria (Wednesday, 3 August)
• RE: Acceptance Criteria for proposals for new Success Criteria (Wednesday, 3 August)
• RE: Success Criteria guidance (Tuesday, 2 August)
• RE: Parallax and vestibular disorders (Tuesday, 2 August)
• RE: Do we want a Biometric Alternative SC in WCAG 2.1? (Friday, 22 July)
• RE: Revise reference to "PDA" in example of Keyboard interface (Friday, 22 July)
• RE: ‘Functional Performance-like’ SC for WCAG 2.1? (Thursday, 21 July)
• RE: ‘Functional Performance-like’ SC for WCAG 2.1? (Thursday, 21 July)
• RE: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Wednesday, 20 July)
• RE: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Wednesday, 20 July)
• RE: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Wednesday, 20 July)
• RE: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Wednesday, 20 July)
• RE: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Wednesday, 20 July)
• RE: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Wednesday, 20 July)
• RE: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Wednesday, 20 July)
• RE: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Wednesday, 20 July)
• RE: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• RE: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"? (Tuesday, 19 July)
• RE: Numbering Scheme for WCAG 2.1 (Monday, 18 July)
• RE: Re[2]: Automated A11y non-issues and SC Parsing 4.1.1 (Monday, 18 July)
• RE: New SC: Meaningful element name (Friday, 15 July)
• RE: New SC: Avoid disrupting working accessibility features (Friday, 15 July)
• RE: Should WCAG explicitly talk about *mainstream* assistive technologies? (Friday, 15 July)
• RE: Should WCAG2.1 provide requirements or guidance on buttons vs. links? (Thursday, 14 July)
• RE: Should WCAG2.1 provide requirements or guidance on buttons vs. links? (Thursday, 14 July)
• RE: Should WCAG2.1 provide requirements or guidance on buttons vs. links? (Wednesday, 13 July)
• RE: 1.4.2 audio control, do we want to require the stop mechanism to be more discoverable? (Tuesday, 12 July)
• RE: 1.4.2 audio control, do we want to require the stop mechanism to be more discoverable? (Tuesday, 12 July)
• RE: 1.4.2 audio control, do we want to require the stop mechanism to be more discoverable? (Tuesday, 12 July)
• RE: Ethics of user testing and people with cognitive disabilities (Tuesday, 12 July)
• RE: 1.4.2 audio control, do we want to require the stop mechanism to be more discoverable? (Monday, 11 July)
• RE: 1.4.2 audio control, do we want to require the stop mechanism to be more discoverable? (Monday, 11 July)
• RE: Should 2.4.4 require Link text or ACCNAME, rather than enclosing sentence etc... (Monday, 11 July)
• RE: Should 2.4.4 require Link text or ACCNAME, rather than enclosing sentence etc... (Monday, 11 July)
• RE: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Friday, 8 July)
• RE: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Thursday, 7 July)
• RE: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Thursday, 7 July)
• RE: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Thursday, 7 July)
• RE: Should 2.4.4 require Link text or ACCNAME, rather than enclosing sentence etc... (Wednesday, 6 July)
• RE: User agent SCs? (Wednesday, 6 July)
• RE: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Tuesday, 5 July)
• RE: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Tuesday, 5 July)
• RE: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• RE: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• RE: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• RE: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• RE: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• RE: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• RE: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• RE: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• RE: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• RE: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• RE: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• RE: Jonathan's concern: Zoom in responsive drops content (Monday, 4 July)
• RE: Conforming alternative for mobile should not be Desktop (Friday, 1 July)

Last message date: Friday, 30 September 2016 15:42:34 UTC