- From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
- Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2016 13:19:57 +0100
- To: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>, "public-mobile-a11y-tf@w3.org" <public-mobile-a11y-tf@w3.org>
On 14/11/2016 13:15, Alastair Campbell wrote: > Patrick wrote: >> A lot of sites that up until now were doing what was ok under WCAG >> 1 / 2 will now fail a new SC that addresses a problem not >> previously covered by WCAG. Seems unavoidable, I think? > > Yes, it’s just this aspect in particular (now that you made it more > concrete with an example!) hits home as one that makes a default site > fail a new guideline. Even an un-styled site would fail, which is > unusual across the guidelines. > > And apologies for jumping in on a topic I haven’t followed closely, > in my defence it is the sort of feedback I’d have once they all go up > for review in Dec. Oh no, the feedback's certainly appreciated. As you say, these are things that would be brought up once it's out for wider review, so good to start formulating some response to this sort of concern early on. P (and yes, due to some personal issues, my responses here may have come across more...direct/confrontational...than usual; it's not intended) -- Patrick H. Lauke www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
Received on Monday, 14 November 2016 12:20:15 UTC