- From: <noreply@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 19:31:00 +0000
- To: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Name: Glenda Sims Email: glenda.sims@deque.com Affiliation: Senior Accessibility Consultant at Deque Document: TD Item Number: G141 Part of Item: Description Comment Type: editorial Summary of Issue: Use of "should" and "must" defined Comment (Including rationale for any proposed change): It might be useful to clearly indicate the definition of the words "should" and "must" for the purpose of requirements versus recommendations. This would apply to all parts of WCAG 2.0. I mentioning it here on this technique, because this is where I recently had a debate about what "should" means versus what "must" means. Proposed Change: Make it obvious that "should" is recommended while "must" is required. You could use the definitions found at http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt. You could also consider making the words "must" and "should" hotlink to the definition. Or, not. Just an idea.
Received on Tuesday, 19 April 2011 19:31:05 UTC