- From: Katie Haritos-Shea <ryladog@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2018 10:06:04 -0500
- To: John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com>
- Cc: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>, COGA TF <public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org>, Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>, Joshue O Connor <josh@interaccess.ie>
- Message-ID: <CAEy-OxEOyfr-cPFjCnFiUgjkYOtVbUVWE29ZWzhacO-qH1sG7g@mail.gmail.com>
Alastair, Thanks for taking on the work for this Understanding content. ** katie ** *Katie Haritos-Shea* *Principal ICT Accessibility Architect * *WCAG/Section 508/ADA/AODA/QA/FinServ/FinTech/Privacy,* *IAAP CPACC+WAS = * *CPWA* <http://www.accessibilityassociation.org/cpwacertificants> *Cell: **703-371-5545 <703-371-5545>** |* *ryladog@gmail.com <ryladog@gmail.com>* *| **Oakton, VA **|* *LinkedIn Profile <http://www.linkedin.com/in/katieharitosshea/>* People may forget exactly what it was that you said or did, but people will never forget how you made them feel....... Our scars remind us of where we have been........they do not have to dictate where we are going. On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 9:45 AM, John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com> wrote: > Hi Alastair, > > Much better, thanks. > > One remaining sticking point... you indicate a change in SC name to > "Autocomplete", which I wouldn't completely oppose, but the WG has yet to > discuss or consent to that change (nor this Draft Text). There *are* other > proposals for a change of name, some of which I have previously offered > on-list: > > - Common Inputs > - Automated Inputs > - Metadata on Inputs (<< This introduces the concept of metadata, > which may be a positive reinforcement) > > Perhaps we could ask the Chairs (all 3 - congrats BTW) to add this to the > agenda for today's call? One larger question remains: *CAN* we make an > editorial change of this significance at this stage of the CR process? I > believe so, but we need to dot the "I"s and cross the "T"s... > > JF > > > On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 4:04 AM, Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com> > wrote: > >> Hi John, >> >> >> >> Thanks for the review, I’ve made updates, some comments/replies also: >> >> >> >> 1) … HOWEVER both ways still use the @autocomplete attribute (only). >> >> Good point, I got confused on that. It feels like there should be one for >> true/false, and one for the value, but never mind! >> >> >> >> Updated. >> >> >> >> >> >> 2) "... although it isn’t very helpful for personalisation..." >> >> [JF] I *STRONGLY* reject that assertion (as did Jon Avila >> <https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2018JanMar/1328.html>). >> >> >> >> AC: That was from my email, which was describing the comments from the >> call last week (and not what I said in the understanding doc). >> >> >> >> Whilst the attribute could be used as a basis for adding icons, what I >> mean (in the doc) is that the scope is not very wide. I.e. of all the >> attributes / purposes we could add, this is a small sub-set. >> >> >> >> The second paragraph of the understanding talks about personalisation and >> being future-compatible. However, any suggestion that this would be the >> basis or reason for adding personalisation is likely to run into issues – >> it isn’t enough to justify it. >> >> >> >> >> 3) Metadata tokens >> >> >> >> I’ll add a link to the semantics spec in the 2nd paragraph. >> >> >> >> >> >> 4) Housekeeping >> >> >> Yea, I don’t find the non-hyphenated one as readable, but I think the US >> spelling aspect will win there. >> >> Updated. >> >> >> >> https://alastairc.ac/tmp/autocomplete.html >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> >> >> -Alastair >> > > > > -- > John Foliot > Principal Accessibility Strategist > Deque Systems Inc. > john.foliot@deque.com > > Advancing the mission of digital accessibility and inclusion >
Received on Tuesday, 27 February 2018 15:06:30 UTC