Results of issue review at September 29, 2005, WCAG meeting

Here are the notes I took during the review of the Guideline 3.1 issues at 
the September 29, 2005 WCAG working group meeting:

#1446 - group does not want this info added to L3 SC5. See the results of 
the survey for details [1].   It was resolved to close this issue and add 
this information as an advisory technique to guideline 3.1 without 
attaching it to a specific success criteria.

#1398 - some discussion on whether language subtags should be required or 
not.  Resolved to close and reference the ISO standard in the general 
technique. 

#1402 - Christophe had issues concerning some abbreviations where the 
meaning is more useful than the direct expansion.  I took an action to 
update the technique from information that Christophe has sent me.  Update 
the technique and close the issue.

#1403 and #814 - close as proposed - no discussion.

#1405 - close as proposed

#1448 - replace "your own language" with "the language of the delivery 
unit" and close as proposed.

#1555 - close as proposed but might want to check with Diane for why she 
voted to keep open. 

#1566 - close as proposed.

#1628 - Christophe felt that L3 SC1 should be removed since the most 
important issue is covered by L3 SC2 but agreed to close the issue and 
leave the SC as is.
There was some discussion that this is a level 3 and not likely to be 
implemented. Andi commented that if we really don't expect people to 
implement level 3 than we should remove it because it could be adopted by 
policy makers.  It was agreed that the group needs to take up the issues 
of do we have 2 or 3 levels in WCAG.

#1629 - close but make certain to include link to UNESCO standard in the 
guide.  Send note to issue submitter after next draft is published and see 
if the concerns are adequately addressed in the updated draft.

#1712 - closed since person who disagreed with closing was not on the call 
and provided no comments in the survey.

#1745 - incorporate Christophe's comments into abbreviations technique and 
close.

#1405 - close as proposed.

#853 - close as proposed.

There was also some discussion about reordering the level 3 success 
criteria.  Gregg suggested moving the current #3 (abbreviations) before #2 
(definitions of jargon) but nothing was resolved. 


[1] http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/20050928-teamb/results

Becky Gibson
Web Accessibility Architect
                                                       
IBM Emerging Internet Technologies
5 Technology Park Drive
Westford, MA 01886
Voice: 978 399-6101; t/l 333-6101
Email: gibsonb@us.ibm.com

Received on Tuesday, 4 October 2005 14:42:54 UTC