- From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 07:37:36 -0500
- To: Michael Gower <michael.gower@ca.ibm.com>
- Cc: Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>, Glenda Sims <glenda.sims@deque.com>, Joshue O Connor <josh@interaccess.ie>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Hi Michael, Love your summaries and Alastair's idea of how they might be incorporated. Kindest Regards, Laura On 4/24/18, Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com> wrote: > Hi Michael, (and everyone, question at the end) > > Just to pick up the conversation after the call, where you said: > >> The advantages are obvious: the reader gains an immediate understanding of >> what they doing (mine) and why (Glenda's), which is often not the case >> from the SC language. > > For consistency with the 2.0 docs I think your suggested summary statements > make sense as the first sentence if you pre-pend them with "The intent of > this Success Criterion (SC) is to..." > > It would be a useful "polishing" exercise once we've got the major drafting > & reviews done, I'd rather not interrupt that momentum by making changes > across the various branches just yet. > > I've added an issue for tracking, all going well, something to tackle next > week: > https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/882 +1 -- Laura L. Carlson
Received on Thursday, 26 April 2018 12:38:00 UTC