Re: Results from today's WCAG WG meeting: all our changes accepted, with two editorial edits; also a review of our remaining tasks

looks good

now that is see it -- I see one small change needed.

other than putting focus on that portion of the compound document
other than putting focus on or removing it from that portion of the compound document

Gregg
--------------------------------------------------------
Gregg Vanderheiden Ph.D.
Director Trace R&D Center
Professor Industrial & Systems Engineering
and Biomedical Engineering University of Wisconsin-Madison
Technical Director - Cloud4all Project - http://Cloud4all.info
Co-Director, Raising the Floor - International - http://Raisingthefloor.org
and the Global Public Inclusive Infrastructure Project -  http://GPII.net

On Jun 11, 2013, at 12:06 PM, Peter Korn <peter.korn@oracle.com> wrote:

> Hi gang,
> 
> At today's WCAG WG meeting, we went over our penultimate survey.  They accepted as proposed:
>  Definition of accessibility services of platform software
> Programmatically Determined
> Programmatically Set
> Principle 4: 
> Guideline 4.
> Short Name added to title
> They had two minor editorial changes to the Note in Change of Context, and the Note in SC 3.2.1 On Focus:
> In the Change of context note they removed a phrase to make things more clear: 
> [Note: a change in the user agent might include bringing up a new window to handle a new or some portion of the document, or might be a significant change in the menus and/or toolbars that are displayed and available for interacting with some portion of the document.]
> 
> In the SC 3.2.1 Note, the modified the first phrase of the final sentence:
> Note: Some compound documents and their user agents are designed to provide significantly different viewing and editing functionality depending upon what portion of the compound document is being interacted with (e.g. a presentation that contains an embedded spreadsheet, where the menus and toolbars of the user agent change depending upon whether the user is interacting with the presentation content, or the embedded spreadsheet content).  So long as the mechanism by which the user indicates they are interacting with a different portion of the compound document is by some means other than reception of focus within that portion of the compound document (e.g. by a menu choice or special keyboard gesture), that [If the user uses a mechanism other than putting focus on that portion of the compound document with which they mean to interact (e.g. by a menu choice or special keyboard gesture), any resulting] <glossary link>change of context</glossary link> wouldn't be subject to this success criterion because it was not caused by a change of focus.
> 
> Gregg and I feel these are editorial changes, as no meaning changes.  If anyone disagrees, please reply in this thread stating that, and we can discuss it on Friday.
> 
> 
> Otherwise, I think all the work that remains is noted on To do before 3rd/final public draft: 
> Michael to integrate all approved changes (much of this is done, some still remains)
> Potential edits to come from Judy to the introduction
> Decide (and spell out in introduction) what our comment period should be
> Misc. editorial issues (do WCAG2ICT Notes go inside or outside the "white box", etc.)
> Our final check (and approval) of the intended 3rd public draft
> WCAG WG's final check (and approval) of the intended 3rd public draft
> 
> How much of this can we do in the coming 7 days...?
> 
> Peter
> -- 
> <oracle_sig_logo.gif>
> Peter Korn | Accessibility Principal
> Phone: +1 650 5069522 
> 500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood City, CA 94065 
> <green-for-email-sig_0.gif> Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment