Friday, 29 June 2007
Saturday, 30 June 2007
Friday, 29 June 2007
- \"keyboard interface\" WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- \"idioms\" WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- \"human language\" WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- \"Contrast ratio\" definition and user-selected colours WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- resizing of form controls WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Handling non-conformance of one of many pages in a product WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- \'Description of the URI\' does not map well to a \'product\' WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Requirement for \'7.) Full Pages\' may be too narrow WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Editorial WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Editorial WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Readability is broken WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Interface Design WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- What about non-visually evident? WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- An advisory on anti-aliased fonts. WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- A new Success Criterion regarding use of color. WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Keep 2.4.4 as a Level-A Success Criterion. WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Significant improvement over previous drafts. WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Transcripts not given adequate relevance WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Transcript = text allows no captions WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Wording suggests that a link context is required WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- elevator safety code violations ---IHS WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Definition of \"Mechanism\" needs clarification WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Referencing User Agents and Assistive Technologies WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Defintion of \"programmatically determined link context\" refers to \"sentence\". WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- \"Interruptions\" may warrant a higher priority WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Respecting OS keyboard accessibility features WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- \"Optional components...\" meta-data reference, pt 2 WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- \"Optional components...\" typo and awkward sentence WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- \"machine-readable metadata\" preferred...but do UAs support it? WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- \"Non-Interference\" \"No Keyboard Trap\" dependend on UA/plugin as well WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Addition to \"Accessibility-Supported Technologies\" WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- IBM Comments to WCAG 2 May 17 Working Draft Andrew LaHart
- \"all\" of the following requirements CAN\'T be met, as depends on chosen level WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Addition to \"Creating your own list...\" section. WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Addition to \"Creating your own list...\" section. WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Awkward and incomplete wording WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- bullet 2, \"checked\", seems unnecessary WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- just \"in text\"? WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- reclassing it from AAA to A WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- mechanism, or should it be \"programmatically determined\", or both? WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- whole SC seems unnecessary WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- just \"users with disabilities\"? WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- the SC should be applicable even on a single page WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- in practice, difference between \"blink\" and \"flash\" still unclear, even with appendix WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- just \"users with disabilities\"? WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- 2.1.1. trying to cover two separate issues in one go? WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- resized without AT (same issue as my comment to 1.4.4) WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- resized without AT WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Awkwkard non-word \"turnon\" WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- just \"visually\" evident? WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- just \"people with disabilities\"? WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- just applicable to \"instructions\"? WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Can CSS colour be classed as \"programmatically determined\"? WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- prerecorded or pre-recorded? WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- 1.1. Non-text Content / Controls-Input WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Rewording 1.1 slightly to include pure text, and a comma WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- \"Accessibility Supported\" awkward sentence WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- \"Accessibility Supported\" comma and small change WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- \"Programmatically Determined\" addition to last sentence WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- \"Programmatically Determined\" awkward sentence WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- \"Web Page\" definition and user agents, pt 2 WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- \"Web Page\" definition and user agents WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- \"Web Page\" definition WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Comma and \"but\" in \"Advisory Techniques\" WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Apologetic whining in \"Sufficient Techniques\" explanation WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Awkward wording for new technologies bit WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Awkward wording on confomance level WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- AT heavy \"levels of conformance\" bullet points WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Stray comma WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Sound Volume Control WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Stray comma and \"standard\"? WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Accessible Technology WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Intro to the four principles WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Re: Your comments on WCAG 2.0 Last Call Draft of April 2006 Shawn Henry
- only 9 pages long WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Guidelines, not requirements? WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Responsible for \"200%\" and 50%\" WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- How to measure dB(A) SPL and Tools WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Rationale for \"200%\" and 50%? WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Why \"18 point or 14 point bold\"? WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- What does \"accessibility support\" mean? WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Why \"Documented lists\" needed? WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- about \"Accessibility Supported\" WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Notes 1 and 2 on the Assistive Technology Definition WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- The presentation is unnecessarily difficult. WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Use heading for different columns in web page layouts? WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Let the user use her preferred format for input WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Present more techiques on how improve texts WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Change alternative number two \"Checked\" WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Add video-clips to illustrate solutions WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Replace term \"visually rendered\" WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Addition of a related resource WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Mention of the Microsoft Word Readability Formulas WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Replace example 4 WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Human testers should always be persons with disabilities WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Symbols illustrating texts can be ignored by assistive technology WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Clearly identify supplemental content or alternate version WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Include criterion 3.1.5 in levels A and AA WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Reading level changed to primary education level WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- RE: Your comments on WCAG 2.0 Last Call Draft of April 2006 (1 of 3) Greg Lowney
- Prohibiting images of important text WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- This SC is at a level that will not be adopted by many sites β?? it is too important to leave at β??AAAβ?? WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- The phrasing of this SC is not definitive enough WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Time Limit for Access Control WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- WCAG 2.0 Comment Submission WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- WCAG 2.0 Comment Submission WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- WCAG 2.0 Comment Submission WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Time Limit for Security WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- WCAG 2.0 Comment Submission WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Guideline 2.2 WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Layout using CSS WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Guideline 1.3 WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- A, AA, AAA criteria WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- General WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Time Limit for Security/Access Control WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- How to measure dB(A) SPL and Tools WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Grounds for \"200%\" WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Re: Stronger statement about accessibility for people with cognitive disability Sandra Vassallo
- Text resizing WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Clarification on Conformance Requirements for Alternative Content WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- doing a little more for people with cognitive limitations WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Success Criterion score WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Increase SC for 3.3.4 WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- 3.1.4 SC should be AA WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- SC level for 3.1.3 WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- SC 2.4.8 should be at higher level WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- contrast ratio SC level WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Does HTML using pt or px meet this with today\'s user agents? WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Stronger statement about accessibility for people with cognitive disability WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Skip links are not required to be visible (G1) WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Add definition of testability to Guidelines (Introduction & Glossary) WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Not clear that it\'s ok to provide directions once for a site. WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Which sc covers frame names? WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Guideline does not mention the need for equivalent alternatives (only SC). WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Should Icons be included in contrast requirements? WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- The parenthetical phrase is confusing WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- The relationship between labels and names is not clear enough. WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
- Please Remove the \"Testability\" Requirement WCAG 2.0 Comment Form
Thursday, 28 June 2007
Wednesday, 27 June 2007
Tuesday, 26 June 2007
Monday, 25 June 2007
Sunday, 24 June 2007
Saturday, 23 June 2007
Friday, 22 June 2007
Thursday, 21 June 2007
Wednesday, 20 June 2007
Monday, 18 June 2007
Sunday, 17 June 2007
Saturday, 16 June 2007
Friday, 15 June 2007
Thursday, 14 June 2007
Wednesday, 13 June 2007
Tuesday, 12 June 2007
Monday, 11 June 2007
Sunday, 10 June 2007
Saturday, 9 June 2007
Thursday, 7 June 2007
Friday, 8 June 2007
Thursday, 7 June 2007
Wednesday, 6 June 2007
Tuesday, 5 June 2007
Friday, 1 June 2007
Last message date: Saturday, 30 June 2007 18:52:39 UTC