Re: Moving Issues 62, 63, 71 to the conformance section

Here's another option which might be easier:

***

"If components change form based on screen size, they remain
programmatically determinable and keyboard operable."

***

It would be placed after the last paragraph in the section "Understanding
Requirement 2" just before the Notes at the end of the section.
https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/conformance.html#uc-
conformance-requirements-head


Cheers,
David MacDonald



*Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*
Mobile:  613.806.9005

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 Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 12:50 PM, White, Jason J <jjwhite@ets.org> wrote:

> Thanks, David – see further comments below.
>
>
>
> *From:* David MacDonald [mailto:david@can-adapt.com]
>
> I like your second condition, adding an "AND" for different AT in those
> environments.
>
>
>
>  Regarding the first condition, Gregg expressed concern regarding using
> broad strokes for the customized view. He suggested we limit it to "size".
> He was nervous that there might be customized delivery of content such
> information spoken in a car etc, that by its very nature could not meet the
> conformance language and inhibit adoption of the standard.
>
> *[Jason] I would like to see good examples of this that would meet both of
> my conditions and which would raise difficulties.*
>
>
>
> So if I was to take your proposal and adjust it to size, it would look
> something like this.
>
>
>
> If (1) the content includes features that adapt its presentation or
> functionality based on screen sizes in specific hardware or software
> environments, and (2) different user agents or assistive technologies are
> in use in each of these respective environments, then the ways in which
> technologies are relied upon to satisfy the success criteria are only
> accessibility-supported if they are compatible with user agents and
> assistive technologies in each of the environments for which adaptations
> are provided.
>
>
>
> However, arguing against myself, your proposal  does limit the scope to
> environments with different AT. If there is no AT for that environment,
> then maybe your language is OK.
>
> *[Jason] Yes, I’m in favor of mentioning screen size, if at all, only as
> an example. Both of the conditions do need to be met for the proposal to
> apply, and it only clarifies (at most, expands) the nature of the
> compatibility guarantee.*
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> 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.
> ------------------------------
>