- From: Loretta Guarino Reid <lguarino@adobe.com>
- Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2006 22:36:53 -0800
- To: "public-wcag-teamb@w3.org" <public-wcag-teamb@w3.org>
I've been editing 3.1.1 and 3.1.2, primarily to put them into the standard template format. Could you please review them? http://trace.wisc.edu/wcag_wiki/index.php?title=How_to_Meet_Success_Criterio n_3.1.1 http://trace.wisc.edu/wcag_wiki/index.php?title=How_to_Meet_Success_Criterio n_3.1.2 I have a few specific requests: 1. Can someone provide examples and a test procedure for the 3.1.2 failure "Failure due to using CSS styling to control directionality in XHTML/HTML" (My CSS is even worse than my HTML.) 2. As far as I can tell from the resources, there are many (but not all) instances where the Unicode bidirectional algorithm is sufficient to determine left-to-right and right-to-left properties of the tests. Should we list using Unicode as a general technique? Or should this be addressed in the discussion of "Identifying text direction of passage and phrases"? Only there is no conditional in our sufficient technique. Are there additional accessibility-related requirements for marking up all changes in direction explicitly? 3. I reduced the number of common failures related to text direction. I think people would be better served reading Richard Ishida's discussions of these issues. Doe this seem ok? 4. The HTML technique " Using the lang attribute to identify changes in the natural language" discusses lang vs xml:lang, etc. Do we want to continue to itemize those distinctions in the How To Meet document, as currently written? Loretta
Received on Sunday, 19 February 2006 06:37:08 UTC