W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-comments-wcag20@w3.org > August 2010

Comments on Techniques for WCAG 2.0 and Understanding WCAG 2.0 drafts

From: Ian Pouncey <w3c@ipouncey.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2010 22:21:49 +0100
Message-ID: <AANLkTikb4ogT-etrAG4HbSXSHaz2j-w0TW1SDT2PxBbU@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Techniques for WCAG 2.0:

http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2010/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20100708/complete-diff.html#suff-adv-techs
    1st paragraph addition ('In some cases...') is quite unwieldy. I
understand what it is saying, but can the wording be more concise?

http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2010/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20100708/complete-diff.html#G18-description
    4th paragraph addition ('For example, if a letter is lighter...'),
change 'or a thin black outline (at least one pixel wide)' to 'or add
a thin black outline (at least one pixel wide)'.

http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2010/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20100708/complete-diff.html#G71-procedure
    2nd point change, drop the word 'help' to leave 'Determine if
there is at least one link to information explaining how to complete
the form on this Web page.'

http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2010/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20100708/complete-diff.html#G117-examples
    I don't think example 1 is as good as it could be. Visual changes
should not be made using semantic elements unless the meaning matches
that of the element. Strong emphasis does not mean 'New' unless you
also want to emphasise that the element _is_ new (and the text makes
no mention in this change of meaning beyond the visual aspect), and in
this case wouldn't emphasis (<em>) rather than strong emphasis
(<strong>) suffice? Also the '(new)' text would be better as part of
the emphasised text - it is the fact that the item is new that is to
be brought to the users attention, not specifically the item itself.

http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2010/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20100708/complete-diff.html#G181-description
    The change in the first paragraph is in error and can be removed
to leave 'data that will be submitted'.

http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2010/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20100708/complete-diff.html#G182-examples
    The 3rd paragraph should be changed to read '...so that users who
have problems distinguishing between colors can identify...'. Unless
you are from Pingelap the inability to see colour completely is quite
rare, and even true monochromats can distinguish ~100 colours.

http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2010/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20100708/complete-diff.html#H42-ex1
    Why are there spaces at the beginning of each element?

http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2010/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20100708/complete-diff.html#H48-ex4
    Is there a reason for each link to be part of a paragraph?
    The second set of example CSS is not correctly indented.

http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2010/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20100708/complete-diff.html#H50-ex2
    I have never seen this technique used (or even considered for use)
before, but assuming this works well would the links not be best
marked up as a list as is usual good practice?

http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2010/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20100708/complete-diff.html#H63-ex1
    Why wouldn't the first column have a header in this case?

http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2010/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20100708/complete-diff.html#H85-ex2
    Indentation of code is inconsistent.

http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2010/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20100708/complete-diff.html#H92-ex1
    Add space before '(required)' in <label>.
    Wrap CSS in <style> element.

http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2010/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20100708/complete-diff.html#C9-ex3
    Citations are better marked up with <cite> elements.

http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2010/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20100708/complete-diff.html#C15-ex2
    This example won't work in all major browsers.

http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2010/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20100708/complete-diff.html#SCR35-description
    I know this document isn't intended to show good practice in
JavaScript, but do we really have to encourage the propagation of such
a horrible technique?

http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2010/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20100708/complete-diff.html#ARIA1-examples
    More poor quality examples, specifically presentational classes
(left, right) and inline click handlers, poor performance JavaScript.


Understanding WCAG 2.0 drafts:

http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2010/WD-UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20-20100708/complete-diff.html#introduction-layers-techs-head
    1st paragraph addition ('In some cases...') is quite unwieldy. I
understand what it is saying, but can the wording be more concise?

http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2010/WD-UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20-20100708/complete-diff.html#visual-audio-contrast-without-color-61-head
    Change 5th point to 'Users who have problems distinguishing
between colors...'.
Received on Monday, 9 August 2010 21:53:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:11:13 UTC