- From: <akirkpat@adobe.com>
- Date: Wed, 19 Feb 2014 03:23:15 +0000
- To: EOWG <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
- Cc: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Dear EOWG , The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group has reviewed the comments you sent [1] on the Last Call Working Draft [2] of the Techniques for WCAG 2.0 published on 16 Jan 2014. Thank you for having taken the time to review the document and to send us comments! The Working Group's response to your comment is included below. Please review it carefully and let us know by email at public-comments-wcag20@w3.org if you agree with it or not before 02/25/2014. In case of disagreement, you are requested to provide a specific solution for or a path to a consensus with the Working Group. If such a consensus cannot be achieved, you will be given the opportunity to raise a formal objection which will then be reviewed by the Director during the transition of this document to the next stage in the W3C Recommendation Track. Thanks, For the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group, Michael Cooper W3C Staff Contact 1. http://www.w3.org/mid/E1WESw8-00083p-N1@shauna.w3.org 2. http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2014/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20140107/ ===== Your comment on WAI-ARIA Technology Notes: > Comment Type: editorial > Summary of Issue: minor editorial: In ARIA > Techniques<http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2014/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20140107/complete-diff.html#wai-aria_ua_suppor > Comment (Including rationale for any proposed change): > minor editorial: In ARIA > Techniques<http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2014/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20140107/complete-diff.html#wai-aria_ua_support>, > capitalize "W3C Recommendation" in: > " > Accessibility Support for WAI-ARIA > Using technologies in an Accessibility Supported way is required for > conformance claims. Read more about Accessibility Support. The WCAG > Working Group plans to review which WAI-ARIA techniques are sufficient > when Accessible Rich Internet Application specifications reach W3C > recommendation status. ... Working Group Resolution (LC-2896): Thank you for the correction, we've made the change as you suggested. ----
Received on Wednesday, 19 February 2014 03:23:25 UTC