public-comments-wcag20@w3.org from March 2011 by author

Loretta Guarino Reid

• 31 March 2011 Agenda ======================================= (Tuesday, 29 March)
• Re: The second part of the description (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: Two instances of "call the up the class" (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: Failure Example 4 (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: Title that may confuse the reader (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: SM6, SM7: SC 1.2.5 (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: last line of test redundant (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: Table of Content needs summary of collections (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: I think there is a failure missing (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: wrong success criteria association (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: Techniques for WCAG 2.0: T3: Using standard text formatting conventions for headings (TXT) (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: Check for CSS seems less useful than test for use of deprecated elements (e.g., font, center, strike, i, b, u) (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: Test contradicts other options to meet SC 1.4.4 (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: Test for percent is in itself not meaningful, should encompass %, em, font size names (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: H89: certainly cannot be a sufficient technique (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: use of fieldset should not be required for any group of logically related input elements (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: Test whether all th Elements have scope attribute misleading (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: Equivalence of content of noembed element not explicitly checked (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: The test for the correct use of longdesc should be conditional on its application (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: Test does not check top position of link or mechanism (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: The test should include a check whether the function to turn off blinking content is documented (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: Requirement for 200% text increase nearly impossilbe to meet in most cases (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: Test needs specification of window size and criteria for compliance (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: Missing explicit requirement that styleswitcher be positioned at the top of the page (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: Test does not cover appropriateness of audio description (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: either/or test seems incorrect: #2 must be true (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: Test in G68 does not seem to fit (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: Reword G1 'Description' and 'Note'. (This will make "Skip to Main" as a permanent visible link) (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: F61: 24 hours? (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: SM7: Expected Results (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: SCR19 applies to SC 3.2.2 too (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: G150: procedure and policy (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: G97: Only "immediately following the expanded form"? (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: G93: SC 1.2.4 (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: H82 missing? (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: (None currently documented) stands at the beginning of examples, although examples are available (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: None currently documented should not be there (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: no link to single file from http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/Overview.html (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: techniques link to 20081211 version (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: Note at end of sufficient techniques for 3.3.2 is ambiguous (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: Understanding WCAG 2- SC 2.4.3 (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: I feel that the 2 sufficient techniques should be 'and' not 'or'. (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: WCAG 2techniques for SC 1.3.2 and 2.4.3 (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: Understanding WCAG 2- SC 1.3.1 (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: SC 3.2.1 Keyboard users only? (Wednesday, 23 March)
• Re: Sufficient techniques- definition and guidance (Wednesday, 23 March)

noreply@w3.org

• Difficult word to grasp (Monday, 21 March)
• The second part of the description (Monday, 21 March)
• Failure Example 4 (Monday, 21 March)
• Two instances of "call the up the class" (Wednesday, 16 March)
• Make title of a document easier to identify (Friday, 4 March)
• Translation of an easy-to-read text (Friday, 4 March)
• Word replacement (Friday, 4 March)
• Expanding acronym of WCAG 2.0 in the document title (Friday, 4 March)

Sailesh Panchang

• Re: I feel that the 2 sufficient techniques should be 'and' not 'or'. (Thursday, 24 March)
• Re: Understanding WCAG 2- SC 1.3.1 (Wednesday, 23 March)

Sheena McCullagh

• RE: I think there is a failure missing (Thursday, 24 March)
• RE: I feel that the 2 sufficient techniques should be 'and' not 'or'. (Wednesday, 23 March)

Last message date: Tuesday, 29 March 2011 21:29:09 UTC