W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wcag-act-comments@w3.org > August 2018

Re: ACT Framework 1.0 public comment

From: Anne Thyme Nørregaard <ath@siteimprove.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 12:56:00 +0000
To: Shadi Abou-Zahra <shadi@w3.org>, "public-wcag-act-comments@w3.org" <public-wcag-act-comments@w3.org>
Message-ID: <18F3DCA7-E68A-4BF4-86DB-D6F7D3C29A0C@siteimprove.com>
When reading through the document and Shadi's comments, I found some editorial issues too.
The attached document contains both Shadi's and my comments. 


Best Regards,
 
Anne Thyme Nørregaard
Digital Accessibility Product Expert
 
www.siteimprove.com
 
Sankt Annæ Plads 28  |  DK-1250 København K
Mobile +45 23 28 53 91  |  
ath@siteimprove.com
 
Facebook <https://www.facebook.com/Siteimprove>   Twitter <https://twitter.com/Siteimprove>   LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/company/siteimprove>
 

On 01/08/2018, 18.37, "Shadi Abou-Zahra" <shadi@w3.org> wrote:

    Please find my comments attached. Many of them are editorial but several 
    are substantive. Here is a summary of the high-level issues:
    
    - In several sections it is unclear what the specific requirements are 
    to conform with this specification. The tone is often conversational 
    rather than direct and instructional. Clearer definition using the MUST, 
    SHOULD, MAY keywords would help specify the requirements more directly.
    
    - There are no requirements on the actual format for providing the rules 
    and test cases. For example, do I have to list all the atomic rules of a 
    composed rule in one section? Does that section have to have a heading 
    identifying it as such? Does this have to be in an accessible document 
    format? I think a minimal set of requirements would be important.
    
    - Some terms, like "test subject" do not have a clear definition.
    
    - Some sections would be much clearer with examples.
    
    - Sometimes keywords are used, but not meant as requirements definition. 
    For example, using the word "may" meaning "might" in a sentence. This is 
    inconsistent with their definition in the "conformance section".
    
    
    Regards,
       Shadi
    
    -- 
    Shadi Abou-Zahra - https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FPeople%2Fshadi%2F&amp;data=02%7C01%7Cath%40siteimprove.com%7Ce34fef9b64f848cb642f08d5f7ccdbe5%7Cad30e5bc301d40dba10a0e8d40abe0f9%7C0%7C0%7C636687382446553341&amp;sdata=4epRWISxHSmOSae6i2IE2LcPO2DHfTuh72I6ykOSzuI%3D&amp;reserved=0
    Accessibility Strategy and Technology Specialist
    Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
    World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
    

Received on Wednesday, 15 August 2018 12:56:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:55:19 UTC