Re: ISSUE-66 Change Proposal: be more explicit about potential repair techniques

On Mar 9, 2010, at 6:37 PM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 7:29 PM, John Foliot <>  
> wrote:
>> Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
>>> Shelley's intent notwithstanding, I'd still like to hear
>>> from others who were part of the original discussion.
>> I am cautiously watching what replacement language emerges, given  
>> that Ian
>> has shown a willingness to work with Matt's suggestions.  I  
>> steadfastly
>> maintain that the spec should reference, as the definitive go-to  
>> location,
>> WCAG Success Criteria.
>> As I recall from the last round of discussions, making this  
>> provision was
>> solidly supported by the majority of those involved in the thread.  
>> (And I
>> think that it is and would be wholly appropriate that the HTML WG  
>> request
>> that WAI ensure that this and other sections of the Success Criteria
>> document collection be maintained and updated to reflect emergent
>> solutions in HTML5 and future specifications.)
>> So for now, I am sitting on the sidelines, quietly watching for the  
>> next
>> moves.
> I also support this Change Proposal, though I agree with JF that
> mentioning WCAG would also be a good idea.

Did you guys perhaps mean UAAG rather than WCAG? WCAG is about content  
accessibility, but this part of the spec is all about a UA repair  


Received on Wednesday, 10 March 2010 18:44:37 UTC