Re: LVTF SCs that lack SC acceptance criteria per David MacDonald's review

Hi Glenda,

You're not dreaming. Let's break out the happy dance.

Thanks! I'll update the Wiki page when I get back.

Kindest regards,
Laura
On Dec 29, 2016 11:45 AM, "Glenda Sims" <glenda.sims@deque.com> wrote:

> Laura,
>
> Am I dreaming...or does Issue 10 (Interactive Element Contrast (Minimum)
> now pass all of the requirements (per David MacDonald) for a reasonable
> SC?  See all the yeses here https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/
> 1XShLFX8fxHYYLn8A6avDwu37w9JfnZCGWvAKBpK9Xo4/edit#gid=0
>
> (If I am reading this correctly...then I will need to break out the happy
> dance music.  Even if that is true...there are still refinements to be
> made...but this would make me feel AWESOME about our progress.)
>
> G
>
> glenda sims    |   team a11y lead   |    deque.com    |    512.963.3773
> <(512)%20963-3773>
>
> *web for everyone. web on everything.* -  w3 goals
>
> On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 12:34 PM, Laura Carlson <
> laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hello Low Vision Task Force,
>>
>> As we discussed on the call today David MacDonald's December 15, 2016
>> email to the WCAG WG and his spreadsheet indicate that many of the
>> LVTF SCs lack SC acceptance criteria.
>>
>> I have made a list of them on the Wiki:
>> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/low-vision-a11y-tf/wiki/David_MacD
>> onald_SC_Notes_on_LVTF_SCs
>>
>> Kindest Regards,
>> Laura
>>
>> --
>> Laura L. Carlson
>>
>>
>