Hi Alistair,
I'm not sure what the three flashes example is supposed to express here.
Can you clarify?
W
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 5:29 PM, Alistair Garrison <
alistair.garrison@ssbbartgroup.com> wrote:
> Dear All,
>
>
>
> I have an action item to clarify the meaning of “negative” in the
> following section:
>
>
>
> 3.8. 2.8 Rules Test for Failures
>
>
>
> The ACT Framework results in negative feature tests, meaning that ACT
> Rules test for violations instead of compliance. ACT Rules should map to
> [WCAG 2.0 Failure Techniques](https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/failures.
> html) where possible to avoid duplication of work. In some cases absence
> of violations may be proof of compliance, if rules are available to test
> all possible violations.
>
>
>
> I would suggest the following re-write:
>
>
>
> 3.8. 2.8 Rules provide clear reasons for non-compliance
>
>
>
> The ACT Framework will focus on defining rules that enable clear reasons
> for non-compliance to be given to the user e.g. “displayed content in a
> page flashes more than three times per second”. Where possible, ACT Rules
> should map to [WCAG 2.0 Failure Techniques](https://www.w3.
> org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/failures.html).
>
>
>
> Interested to hear thoughts / comments.
>
>
>
> Very best regards
>
>
>
> Alistair
>
>
>
> ---
>
>
>
> Alistair Garrison
>
> Senior Accessibility Engineer
>
> SSB Bart Group
>
--
*Wilco Fiers* - Senior Accessibility Engineer
