Friday, 29 February 2008
Tuesday, 19 February 2008
Friday, 15 February 2008
Saturday, 9 February 2008
- Re: EOWG's replies to WCAG WG resolutions of EOWG comments on May 2007 Draft of WCAG 2.0
- Re: EOWG's replies to WCAG WG resolutions of EOWG comments on May 2007 Draft of WCAG 2.0
Thursday, 7 February 2008
- Re: EOWG's replies to WCAG WG resolutions of EOWG comments on May 2007 Draft of WCAG 2.0
- Re: EOWG's replies to WCAG WG resolutions of EOWG comments on May 2007 Draft of WCAG 2.0
- Re: EOWG's replies to WCAG WG resolutions of EOWG comments on May 2007 Draft of WCAG 2.0
- Re: [WCAG2 TECHS] i18n comment 1: H34 example source direction
- Re: HTML Version of Understanding WCAG with semantic classes and IDs
Wednesday, 6 February 2008
Tuesday, 5 February 2008
Monday, 4 February 2008
- Programmatically determine the role not explained
- Failure does not fail in Firefox
- Technique also works in Firefox
- Version numbers should be added for Firefox
- Hard to accomplish the examples in 3 seconds
- Mouse hover and focus not equivalent
- Links ot ARIA out of date
- Example Doc is XHTML, not HTML
- Updated testing to allow Dojo
- Links to How to Meet SC
- Re: WCAG 2.0: Accessibility supported technologies
- Not testable
- RE: headings and which SC?
Saturday, 2 February 2008
- Change \"accessibility supported\" to \"accessibility-supporting\"
- Add header to first page
- Add header to first page
- \"Item Number\': Abstract. clarify with commas
- Link \'metadata\'
- Remove rationale from Guideine 1.1 text
- Clarify what \'which is optional\' applies to
- changes of context definition
- Typos in Programmatically determiend
- List all contributors to WCAG 2.0
- Consider title change
- Allow users to filter out HTML techniques
- Introduction, second part, trim wording
- Introduction, first part, trim wording
- web page example 4
- user interface component - missing comma
- viewport - awkard
- synchronised media - awkard
- supplemental content
- set of Web pages - unnecessarily convoluted
- set of Web pages - clarify
- role
- real-time event
- programmatically determiend - typo
- programmatically determined / programmatically determinable
- non-text content
- non-text content
- navigated sequentially
- general flash and red threshold - confusing jargon?
- flash
- extended audio - clarification in note
- contrast ratio - generalised copy
- How to create the documented lists
- 80 characters
- Text of Image
- Visually customizable text
- WCAG 2.0 should advance to Candidate Recommendation
Friday, 1 February 2008
- I think I may have answered my own question...
- Can \"conforming alternate versions\" be objects on a page?
- Suggestions to clarify \"media alternatives to text\"
- Comments from Eric Hansen on the 17 Dec 2007 draft of WCAG 2.0
- Failure F70 Does not Prohibit Duplicate Attributes
- SC 3.3.1: Providing client-side validation and adding error text via the DOM (future technique )
- SC 3.1.3: Glossary without Links Should Fail?
- Language Subtags (Techniques H57 and H58)
- contrast algorithm for 1.4.3: Contrast (Minimum)
- G14: Does example 2 fail the success criterion?
- H36: Using alt attributes on images used as submit buttons
- Consistent Presentation (SC 3.2.3)
- G 3.1 covers perceivability as well as understandability
- section headings (SC 2.4.10)
- descriptive labels (SC 2.4.6)
- purpose of each link (SC 2.4.4)
- descriptive titles (SC 2.4.2)
- understand the speech (SC 1.4.7)
- understand the speech output (SC 1.4.2)
- usable default presentation (G 1.4)
- meaningful sequence (SC 1.3.2)
- a voice easy to understand (G 1.1)
- clarification of the term \'understandable\'
- clarification of the term \'perceivable\'
- conforming alternative version - awkward wording
- captions - awkward wording
- blink vs flash
- assistive technology - stray word
- activity where moving, blinking...
- accessibility supported - users\' assistive technologies
- stray word in accessibility supported
- immediately?
- both cases - awkward
- abbreviation refers to \"organization\"?
- awkward phrasing
- Contrast ratio (on text edges)
- Accessibility supported (lists of Web technologies)
- WCAG 2.0 Comment Submission
- Conformance and use of accessibility-supported tehcnologies in a non-conforming way
- Use of roles with current technologies
- Sections Headings conformance level
- Sequential navigation and meaning
- User agents\' incorrect behaviour while navigating sequentially
- Criteria to evaluate essential things
- Concerns about text resizing requirements
- Conformance level too low
- Concerns about 80 characters width limit
- non w3c techiques have to be named with clear examples
- non w3c techiques have to be named with clear examples
- 2.4.10 aa instead of aaa
- 2.4.8 AA instead of AAA
- 2.2.2 - how to handle advertisements
- 1.4.4 - 200% is too high
- 1.4.3 - 5:1 too high
- 1.2 exceptions needed
- 1.2 - terminology not clear
- 1.2.2 not realistic
- 1.2.1 not realistic
- It is unclear if this SC is testable.
- Several Success Criteria include specific values
- clarify keyboard shortcut
- add image map example
- Add image map example
- Image map text alternative
- Add image map example
- Level A for low or no-contrast content
- Optional components and the hint of metadata
- \"Awkward wording
- Sufficient techniques seems to contradict other areas and principles.
- \"well formed\"
- ambiguous if not clear from context already?
- so headings are optional then at anything below AAA?
- dependent on UA?
- sweeping generalisation?
- flashing dependent on size?
- flashing dependent on size, but not specified!
- arbitrary values?
- \"with disabilities\", take two
- \"with disabilities\"
- what if it\'s not the author\'s fault?
- line spacing
- aligned on both left and right
- 80 characters?
- Clarification of advisory techniques
- Clarification of note / awkward phrasing
- Awkward wording
- Add reference to 1.4.1
- Add reference to 1.2.1
- Missing full stop
- Missing full stop
- Metadata sentence right at the end
- \"Webmasters\"
- Combine \"usable in general\" and \"older individuals\"