Re: WCAG 2.2 COGA SC Persistent Labels Ready For Review Edits

Oops. I didn't attach the doc earlier. Here it is

On 11/11/19, 12:54 PM, "David Fazio" <dfazio@helixopp.com> wrote:

    Attached is a Word Doc draft of proposed COGA success criteria Persistent Labels. It begins on page 8 of the Word Doc. As with Information In Steps, I kept everything in one document so everyone could see the evolution of the split. If you want to review, and edit, via Google Docs it begins on page 9. You can access the draft at this link:  https://docs.google.com/document/d/1e46eqQnVYqdSyqo29pyJoY1QynRH9v95YW8soTTbfsU/edit?ts=5d846669.
    
    All comments, and recommendations are welcome.
    
    
    On 11/10/19, 12:37 PM, "David Fazio" <dfazio@helixopp.com> wrote:
    
        Thank you for the review, and edits, EA. I just implemented them. Information in Steps should be ready to go. I will finish up Persistent Labels later today, and send it out in the same document
        
        On 11/5/19, 5:47 AM, "EA Draffan" <ead@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote:
        
            Thanks so much David and I am returning the document with a few queries and I have to admit that I found the alternative easier to understand.  
            That is  
            "Information provided to or obtained from a user in a multi-step process does not need to be re-entered in a subsequent step unless re-entry is essential [or required to ensure the security of the content)" 
            
            Best wishes
            E.A. 
            
            Mrs E.A. Draffan
            WAIS, ECS , University of Southampton
            Mobile +44 (0)7976 289103
            http://access.ecs.soton.ac.uk

            
            
            -----Original Message-----
            From: David Fazio [mailto:dfazio@helixopp.com] 
            Sent: 03 November 2019 21:26
            To: lwatson@tetralogical.com; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org; public-cognitive-a11y-tf <public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org>
            Subject: Re: WCAG 2.2 COGA SC Information in Steps Ready For Review Edits
            
            For everyone that prefers to review this S.C. in a word doc, I made some edits to the Understanding Document online. Here is the revised Word Doc.
            
            On 11/3/19, 12:04 PM, "David Fazio" <dfazio@helixopp.com> wrote:
            
                Sure thing. I've attached the word doc
                
                On 11/3/19, 11:56 AM, "Léonie Watson" <lwatson@tetralogical.com> wrote: