- From: Loretta Guarino Reid <lorettaguarino@google.com>
- Date: Fri, 6 Jul 2007 09:21:21 -0700
- To: "Gian Sampson-Wild" <gian@tkh.com.au>
- Cc: public-comments-WCAG20@w3.org
I'm sorry - I should have provided the SC number in the current draft as well as in the original draft that you commented on. This is now SC 3.3.1. Loretta On 7/6/07, Gian Sampson-Wild <gian@tkh.com.au> wrote: > I don't see a 2.5.1 > > -----Original Message----- > From: Loretta Guarino Reid [mailto:lorettaguarino@google.com] > Sent: Saturday, 7 July 2007 12:36 AM > To: Gian Sampson-Wild > Cc: public-comments-WCAG20@w3.org > Subject: Re: Comment LC-1116 > > This comment referred to SC 2.5.1 "If an input error is detected, the > error is identified and described to the user in text." > > Loretta > > On 7/6/07, Gian Sampson-Wild <gian@tkh.com.au> wrote: > > Comment 89: > > > > Source: http://www.w3.org/mid/001f01c695f9$31b504e0$9288b23a@tkhcomputer > > (Issue ID: LC-1116) > > > > Examples: The example implies that this SC requires that correctly filled > > out fields are kept available after reload - is this what this SC > requires? > > > > Proposed Change: > > > > Clarify the SC > > > > ---------------------------- > > Response from Working Group: > > ---------------------------- > > > > You are right that the success criteria doesn't require all correctly > filled > > out fields to be kept available after reload. We don't believe we can > > require this at Level A, however, as there may be valid reasons, such as > > security and privacy, for not doing this. We have modified the example to > > use an alert instead of a page reload. If authors use this technique, a > good > > benefit is that the user's original entries will be preserved even though > > the success criterion doesn't require it. > > ---------------------------- > > Response from GSW: > > ---------------------------- > > Does this alert require client-side scripting and if so, should WCAG2 be > > requiring the use of a particular technology? Is it possible to say "keep > > fields after reload unless information has security or privacy > requirements > > and instead then provide an alert"? If you can remind me of which SC this > > refers to I can comment more accurately. > > > > > > >
Received on Friday, 6 July 2007 16:21:36 UTC