- From: Joshue O Connor <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie>
- Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2014 10:53:01 +0100
- To: Katie Haritos-Shea GMAIL <ryladog@gmail.com>
- CC: 'Jonathan Avila' <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org, 'Andrew Kirkpatrick' <akirkpat@adobe.com>
[Trimmed cc list] Katie Haritos-Shea GMAIL wrote: [...] > I am first going to make a comment about F65 (because that is the focus of > my concern), and I will review the rest of the email, and comment later. > > > > The important thing about F65 - yes, it is a failure technique - but failure > techniques are what evaluation and repair tool vendors build their tools > around - to identify conformance/non-conformance. And, in that respect, > failures are one of the most important kind of techniques we provide. Having > worked for such a tool vendor, and (like all of us) utilized these tools at > various times, their ability to impact the application of WCAG is > tremendous. Yes, thanks for re-iterating the perspective of the tool vendors. > I share similar concerns about title, and validation, as well as our > approach to the new techniques - that they do not kill access features that > enjoy wide support now. This is a very hard and delicate balance to > transition to new(ish) technologies. And frankly, I am concened about our > (working groups) ability to provide good guidance. I know we *can* find a > correct balance, We will. I have confidence in all of us. We are making progress and are opening up the discussion. Jons article is a part of that, as people will start to think, 'Oh, there more than 1 way to implement *-a11y feature' and so on. Thanks Josh
Received on Monday, 14 April 2014 09:53:38 UTC