>> I don't think "consistency" is a new concept in 2.1. ... > ... my suggestion of aiming it at cross-site consistency with a core-set of terms is used, that is something different. Yes, I agree, I should probably be more clear. I'm speaking about the proposal from yesterday to strip the COGA semantics out of AA. This I think is too general, doesn't accomplish much and is largely covered by 3.2.4, and 3.3.2. "In content implemented using markup languages, the purpose of conventional controls[1] can be consistently, programmatically determined across a set of web pages." I think at AA we need to look at a cut back version of COGA (along with some HTML5 and ARIA attribute values ). I think we are riffing in the same key. 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, Jul 20, 2017 at 4:48 AM, Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com> wrote: > David wrote: > > > I don't think "consistency" is a new concept in 2.1. > > > 3.2.4 Consistent Identification: Components that have the same > functionality within a set of Web pages are identified consistently. (Level > AA) > > > > That’s a good point, however, if my suggestion of aiming it at cross-site > consistency with a core-set of terms is used, that is something different. > > > > Cheers, > > > > -Alastair > > > > >
Received on Thursday, 20 July 2017 10:08:53 UTC