[WCAG2ICT] Prep and agenda for the extra Friday meeting on 10 May

For those who can attend the working session tomorrow, 10 May, There’s a list of items to read or be familiar with to prepare:


  1.  Survey results for (Part 3 of 4 for Issue 4)<https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-issue-4-resize-text/results#xq4>: Are built-in platform accessibility features considered AT?



The conversation today led us to conclude that some additional changes and text are needed for the response in the issue. See the minutes on point 6 (3 of 4 on 1.4.4 Resize Text)<https://www.w3.org/2024/05/09-wcag2ict-minutes#t05> for details of the discussion. We’ll be working in the Google doc section with proposed responses to Point 6<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1p5EX9d5Q9L1CghcECjPMVqIBxg4UJUZ5U3A3EZhNxUQ/edit#heading=h.unzc04jrzs5c>.

  1.  Survey results for (Part 4 of 4 for Issue 4)<https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-issue-4-resize-text/results#xq5>: Does 1.4.4 Resize Text guidance in WCAG2ICT need changes?



Based on the survey results, we’ll be working on proposals for changes to existing WCAG2ICT guidance for 1.4.4<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1p5EX9d5Q9L1CghcECjPMVqIBxg4UJUZ5U3A3EZhNxUQ/edit#heading=h.cc8xzwufd68g> in the Google doc. I’ve started gathering thoughts and concerns expressed in the survey, as well as potential proposed content. Please review and/or add your content/proposals or thoughts on the lettered proposals (currently there’s Proposals A through C).

  1.  Questions we didn’t get to discuss today from the follow-up survey (starting with question 2)<https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-public-comments-group4/results#xq5>. Some edits were suggested which I am capturing in the Google docs if they weren’t already there.

  *   Proposed answer to Issue 257<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TbtNcNjrpog8-6OYloMcPILh2UsqUOXBjPwVwv7dPsw/edit#heading=h.g1tfkw9rkm6f>
  *   Proposed answer to Issue 221<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TbtNcNjrpog8-6OYloMcPILh2UsqUOXBjPwVwv7dPsw/edit#heading=h.ezygzxmjhrno>
  *   Proposed changes to SC problematic for closed for 1.4.10 Reflow<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TbtNcNjrpog8-6OYloMcPILh2UsqUOXBjPwVwv7dPsw/edit#heading=h.ynsr98668tn5>

Best regards,

Mary Jo Mueller
IBM Accessibility Standards Program Manager