W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2017

Adapting Text proposals for next week's survey. (was Re: Adding Greg L's Adapting Text proposals to the Wiki in anticipation of a vote between J&K and H&I)

From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2017 07:29:57 -0500
Message-ID: <CAOavpvc-RMFes8ghgExstQWKdNVvrf3ewG2TjWMvQfNY3wXDMQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>, Gregg C Vanderheiden <greggvan@umd.edu>, Joshue O Connor <josh@interaccess.ie>, Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>, Greg Lowney <gcl-0039@access-research.org>, Jim Allan <jimallan@tsbvi.edu>
Cc: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Hi David, Gregg V, Greg L, Jim, Josh, Andrew, and all,

David, thank you for your email and clarification. We missed you at
yesterday's meeting.

I agree that Greg L's proposal (J&K) isn't testable. It gets us back
to where we first started. I had asked him to edit his J&K section of
the Wiki page. Greg, if you can make your proposal testable, I will
ask that it be added to next Tuesday's survey. If not, I don't think
there is much point as it doesn't meet minimum SC requirements.

Gregg V, the "If the technologies being used can achieve" language was
taken directly from 1.4.5. But we can go back to the language in
Proposal C and simply remove the words "at least" which some people
found confusing.

So I have now added Proposal L&M to the Wiki page [1].

Josh and Andrew, can the L&M proposal please be added to next week's
survey with the simple question asking if anyone can not live with it?

Thanks everyone.

Kindest Regards,
Laura

[1] https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Issue_78_Options#Proposal_L_and_M:_An_in_tandem_2_SC_approach

On 4/13/17, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> I see in the minutes the following:
>
>> davidm adamant about hard metric for testing
>
> Actually I'
> ​m​ not at all
>
> ​"adamant about a
> hard metric"
> ​. ​
> I'm hoping for just ONE metric for each, and it can be ANY one metric.
> ​ I wouldn't call that "hard". It's very soft. I think making authors
> responsible for EVERYTHING is a big mistake. The SC cannot work like that.
> The author needs to declare the font overrides they are relying on for
> their statement of conformance. The tester would test that. It's fine to
> test other things and make recommendations, but for conformance it has to
> be testable, apples to apples between the author and the tester.
>
> Cheers,
> David MacDonald
>
>
>
> *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*
>
> Tel:  613.235.4902
>
> LinkedIn
> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>
>
> twitter.com/davidmacd
>
> GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald>
>
> www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/>
>
>
>
> *  Adapting the web to all users*
> *            Including those with disabilities*
>
> If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy
> <http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html>
>
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 5:33 PM, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
> wrote:
>
>> To me J and K are steps backwards, making authors responsible for all
>> 256,000,000 colors...
>>
>> Cheers,
>> David MacDonald
>>
>>
>>
>> *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*
>>
>> Tel:  613.235.4902 <(613)%20235-4902>
>>
>> LinkedIn
>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>
>>
>> twitter.com/davidmacd
>>
>> GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald>
>>
>> www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/>
>>
>>
>>
>> *  Adapting the web to all users*
>> *            Including those with disabilities*
>>
>> If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy
>> <http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html>
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 1:05 PM, Laura Carlson <
>> laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Greg and all,
>>>
>>> Greg, thank you for your input on the call today [1]. I have added
>>> your proposals to the Wiki page as Proposal J (Level A) that removes
>>> hard metrics from the SC and Proposal K (Level AAA). [2] Please adjust
>>> these as you see fit.
>>>
>>> As Andrew requested, tomorrow I'll ask on-list for a vote between J&K
>>> and H&I [3]. They both use an in tandem 2 SC approach.
>>>
>>> Kindest Regards,
>>> Laura
>>>
>>> [1] https://www.w3.org/2017/04/13-ag-minutes.html#item01
>>>
>>> [2] J&K Proposal
>>> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Issue_78_Options#Greg_L.27s_
>>> Proposal_J_.28Level_A.29_and_K_.28Level_AAA.29:_Also_an_in_
>>> tandem_2_SC_approach
>>>
>>> [3] H&I Proposal
>>> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Issue_78_Options#Proposal_H_.
>>> 28Level_AA.29_and_I_.28Level_AAA.29:_An_in_tandem_2_SC_approach
>>>
>>> --
>>> Laura L. Carlson
>>>
>>>
>>
>


-- 
Laura L. Carlson
Received on Friday, 14 April 2017 12:30:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 14 April 2017 12:30:32 UTC