W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-silver@w3.org > March 2019

Re: WCAG 2.2 acceptance criteria

From: Steve Lee <stevelee@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 2019 09:33:20 +0000
To: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>, "Delisi, Jennie (MNIT)" <jennie.delisi@state.mn.us>, John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com>
Cc: "lisa.seeman@zoho.com" <lisa.seeman@zoho.com>, COGA TF <public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org>, Silver TF <public-silver@w3.org>
Message-ID: <3ce715b3-67b5-fe99-4b39-3f0ceedf0f19@w3.org>
On 08/03/2019 00:53, Alastair Campbell wrote:
>> Be feasibly testable through automated or manual processes, i.e. take a few minutes per page with current tools.
> The update from 2.1 was adding ‘feasible’ and the “i.e…”.
> So there are two aspects:
>  1. It is feasible to test, however we define that.
>  2. Any tools required to (feasibly) test it are available by publication.

So if it's 'however' the "ie" should be "eg" :)

I'd rather drop the time element, as John proposed, as we could discuss 
for ever and will always be somewhat of a moot point when we come to 
review proposed SCs. I do understand and value the intention, it's just 
so hard to quantify. Perhaps make it make time one of a set of things to 
consider when reviewing without attempting to make a judgement call in 
the criteria?

I also think Glenda's clarification of ways of testing adds value so 
could be added.

Received on Friday, 8 March 2019 09:33:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:31:44 UTC