Wednesday, 30 March 2016
- Reminder: Call for Review: Accessibility Requirements for People with Low Vision
- Re[2]: WCAG Agenda 29th March 2016
Tuesday, 29 March 2016
- Re: WCAG Agenda 29th March 2016
- WCAG-ACTION-320: W to prepare mobile a11y wcag extension for wg review http://w3c.github.io/mobile-a11y-extension/
- Re: WCAG Agenda 29th March 2016
- Minutes of WCAG.Next meeting at CSUN
- Re: Proposal to get out of the techniques business on WCAG.NEXT
Monday, 28 March 2016
- Re: Proposal to get out of the techniques business on WCAG.NEXT
- Re: Proposal to get out of the techniques business on WCAG.NEXT
- Re: Proposal to get out of the techniques business on WCAG.NEXT
- RE: Proposal to get out of the techniques business on WCAG.NEXT
- Re: Proposal to get out of the techniques business on WCAG.NEXT
- Re: Proposal to get out of the techniques business on WCAG.NEXT
- RE: Proposal to get out of the techniques business on WCAG.NEXT
- Re: Proposal to get out of the techniques business on WCAG.NEXT
- Re: Proposal to get out of the techniques business on WCAG.NEXT
- Re: Proposal to get out of the techniques business on WCAG.NEXT
Sunday, 27 March 2016
- RE: Proposal to get out of the techniques business on WCAG.NEXT
- Re: Proposal to get out of the techniques business on WCAG.NEXT
- Re: Proposal to get out of the techniques business on WCAG.NEXT
- Re: Proposal to get out of the techniques business on WCAG.NEXT
- Re: Proposal to get out of the techniques business on WCAG.NEXT
- Re: Proposal to get out of the techniques business on WCAG.NEXT
- Re: Proposal to get out of the techniques business on WCAG.NEXT
Saturday, 26 March 2016
- Re: Proposal to get out of the techniques business on WCAG.NEXT
- Proposal to get out of the techniques business on WCAG.NEXT
Friday, 25 March 2016
Friday, 18 March 2016
- Reminder: No WCAG meeting March 22
- Re: What is a "WCAG2.next workshop"?
- Reminder: How to proceed on WCAG 2.next: a design thinking exercise
- What is a "WCAG2.next workshop"?
Thursday, 17 March 2016
Tuesday, 15 March 2016
- Re: Changed links in WCAG Understanding / Techniques
- Changed links in WCAG Understanding / Techniques
- Re: Change in focus for WCAG2.next workshop
- CfC: Publish updated QuickRef
- Re: How to proceed on WCAG 2.next: design thinking exercise
- Draft minutes from 15th March 2016 teleconference
- Re: How to proceed on WCAG 2.next: design thinking exercise
- RE: **Updated** WCAG Agenda March 15th, 2016
Monday, 14 March 2016
- Re: **Updated** WCAG Agenda March 15th, 2016
- RE: Minutes of teleconference on WCAG Next Workshop 14 March 2016
- Change in focus for WCAG2.next workshop
- Minutes of teleconference on WCAG Next Workshop 14 March 2016
Saturday, 12 March 2016
Thursday, 10 March 2016
- RE: Transient states
- Re: Transient states
- RE: Transient states
- Re: Transient states
- TPAC questions
- Re: Transient states
- Re: Transient states
- Re: Transient states
Wednesday, 9 March 2016
- Re: Transient states
- Re: Transient states
- RE: Transient states
- Re: Transient states
- Daylight savings time will change meeting times the next couple weeks
- Re: Transient states
- RE: Transient states
- Re: Transient states
- Re: Transient states
Tuesday, 8 March 2016
- RE: How to proceed on WCAG 2.next: design thinking exercise
- RE: Transient states
- Re: How to proceed on WCAG 2.next: design thinking exercise
- WCAG - March 15th 2016
- How to proceed on WCAG 2.next: design thinking exercise
- WCAG WG Meeting Minutes March 8, 2016
- WCAG-ACTION-319: Work with john f, alastair, david and others to discuss ideas for how to proceed on wcag 2.next and report back on april 5
- Re: WCAG Agenda March 8th 2016
- Re: WCAG Agenda March 8th 2016
- Re: Drop advisory technique H46
- Transient states
Monday, 7 March 2016
Saturday, 5 March 2016
Wednesday, 2 March 2016
Tuesday, 1 March 2016
- CfC: Drop advisory technique H46
- Minutes for March 1 2015 WCAG WG
- Re: WCAG Agenda March 1st 2016
- Re: WCAG Agenda March 1st 2016
- Re: Icon and Icon Fonts: New thread
- RE: WCAG Agenda March 1st 2016
- Re: Icon and Icon Fonts: New thread
- Proposal to change Understanding SC 3.3.2 and related SC applicability
- RE: Icon and Icon Fonts: New thread
- Re: Icon and Icon Fonts: New thread
- Re: CfC: Publish updated Techniques and Understanding documents
- Re: CfC: Publish updated Techniques and Understanding documents
Monday, 29 February 2016
- Re: Icon and Icon Fonts: New thread
- RE: Icon and Icon Fonts: New thread
- Icon and Icon Fonts: New thread
- RE: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- Re: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- Re: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- Re: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- Re: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- Re: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- Re: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- RE: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- Re: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- Re: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- Re: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- Re: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- Re: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- Re: Icon Fonts and contrast
- Re: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- Re: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- Re: CfC: Publish updated Techniques and Understanding documents
- Re: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
Sunday, 28 February 2016
- Re: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- Re: WCAG Agenda March 1st 2016
- Re: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
Saturday, 27 February 2016
Friday, 26 February 2016
- Re: CfC: Publish updated Techniques and Understanding documents
- RE: Publish updated Techniques and Understanding documents
- Re: CfC: Publish updated Techniques and Understanding documents
- RE: Make it more obvious that older versions are out of date / obsolete
- Re: Make it more obvious that older versions are out of date / obsolete
- Make it more obvious that older versions are out of date / obsolete
- RE: Publish updated Techniques and Understanding documents
- Re: CfC: Publish updated Techniques and Understanding documents
- Re: CfC: Publish updated Techniques and Understanding documents
- CfC: Publish updated Techniques and Understanding documents
Thursday, 25 February 2016
- Re: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- Re: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- RE: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- RE: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- Re: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
Wednesday, 24 February 2016
- Re: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- RE: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- Re: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- RE: Re[2]: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- Review of Digital Publishing Accessibility Note http://w3c.github.io/dpub-accessibility/
- RE: Re[2]: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- RE: Re[2]: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- RE: Re[2]: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- RE: Re[2]: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- RE: Re[2]: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- Re: WCAG Agenda February 23, 2016
- RE: Re[2]: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- Re: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- Re: WCAG Agenda February 23, 2016
- Re[4]: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- Re: Re[2]: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- RE: Re[2]: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - whichhas long since been lost in this thread)
- Re[2]: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- Re: WCAG Agenda February 23, 2016
- Re: Icon Fonts and contrast
- Re: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
Tuesday, 23 February 2016
- Comments on: Digital Publishing Accessibility Note
- RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- Re: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- Re: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- RE: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- Re: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- Extension conformance and section 2.4
- Re: Icon Fonts and contrast
- RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- WCAG Working Group Teleconference Minutes--February 23, 2016
- RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- Re: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- Re: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- Re: WCAG Agenda February 23, 2016
- Re: WCAG Agenda February 23, 2016
- RE: Agenda+ How to Meet was: Re: WCAG Agenda February 23, 2016
- RE: WCAG Agenda February 23, 2016
- Re: Agenda+ How to Meet was: Re: WCAG Agenda February 23, 2016
- Icon Fonts and contrast
- Agenda+ How to Meet was: Re: WCAG Agenda February 23, 2016
- Re: WCAG Agenda February 23, 2016
- Re[2]: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- Re: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- Re: Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- Re: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- Color Contrast (was RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2 - which has long since been lost in this thread)
- RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2
Monday, 22 February 2016
- RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- Re: RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- Re: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- Re: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- Re: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- Re: Re[2]: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- RE: Re[2]: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- Re[2]: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- Re[2]: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- Re: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- Re: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- Re: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- Re: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- Re: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- Re: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- Re: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- Re: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- Re: Coming to a decision on 2.2
Saturday, 20 February 2016
Friday, 19 February 2016
- Re: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- Re: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- Re: WCAG Agenda February 23, 2016
- RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- Re: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- Re: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- Re: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- Re: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- Re: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- RE: Coming to a decision on 2.2
Thursday, 18 February 2016
- Re: Coming to a decision on 2.2
- WCAG Agenda February 23, 2016
- Coming to a decision on 2.2
- WCAG FAQ
- Re: Should G83: "Providing text descriptions to identify required fields that were not completed" reference 3.3.2?
- Re: Should G83: "Providing text descriptions to identify required fields that were not completed" reference 3.3.2?
- Re: Should G83: "Providing text descriptions to identify required fields that were not completed" reference 3.3.2?
- Re[2]: Should G83: "Providing text descriptions to identify required fields that were not completed" reference 3.3.2?
- Re: Should G83: "Providing text descriptions to identify required fields that were not completed" reference 3.3.2?
Tuesday, 16 February 2016
- MINUTES: WCAG Agenda 16th February 2016
- Re: Should G83: "Providing text descriptions to identify required fields that were not completed" reference 3.3.2?
- Re: Should G83: "Providing text descriptions to identify required fields that were not completed" reference 3.3.2?
- Ongoing editorial changes to the coga roadmaps
Sunday, 14 February 2016
Friday, 12 February 2016
- Re: Should G83: "Providing text descriptions to identify required fields that were not completed" reference 3.3.2?
- Re: Should G83: "Providing text descriptions to identify required fields that were not completed" reference 3.3.2?
- Re: Should G83: "Providing text descriptions to identify required fields that were not completed" reference 3.3.2?
- Re: Should G83: "Providing text descriptions to identify required fields that were not completed" reference 3.3.2?
- Re: Should G83: "Providing text descriptions to identify required fields that were not completed" reference 3.3.2?
- WCAG Agenda 16th February 2016
Thursday, 11 February 2016
- Re: Should G83: "Providing text descriptions to identify required fields that were not completed" reference 3.3.2?
- Re: Should G83: "Providing text descriptions to identify required fields that were not completed" reference 3.3.2?
Wednesday, 10 February 2016
- RE: Should G83: "Providing text descriptions to identify required fields that were not completed" reference 3.3.2?
- RE: Should G83: "Providing text descriptions to identify required fields that were not completed" reference 3.3.2?
- Re: Should G83: "Providing text descriptions to identify required fields that were not completed" reference 3.3.2?
- RE: Should G83: "Providing text descriptions to identify required fields that were not completed" reference 3.3.2?
- Re: Should G83: "Providing text descriptions to identify required fields that were not completed" reference 3.3.2?
- RE: Should G83: "Providing text descriptions to identify required fields that were not completed" reference 3.3.2?
- RE: Should G83: "Providing text descriptions to identify required fields that were not completed" reference 3.3.2?
- RE: Should G83: "Providing text descriptions to identify required fields that were not completed" reference 3.3.2?
- Should G83: "Providing text descriptions to identify required fields that were not completed" reference 3.3.2?
Tuesday, 9 February 2016
Monday, 8 February 2016
Saturday, 6 February 2016
Friday, 5 February 2016
- Owner need for Github issue "Headings in design have been used to comment inclusion on partial html sections and do not relate to section content #106"
- Re[2]: [LVTF] Technique volunteers needed
- Re: [LVTF] Technique volunteers needed
- Re: Re[2]: Comment / question re. Requirements for WCAG 2.0 Extensions
- RE: Re[2]: Comment / question re. Requirements for WCAG 2.0 Extensions
- Re: Re[2]: Comment / question re. Requirements for WCAG 2.0 Extensions
- [LVTF] Technique volunteers needed
- RE: Re[2]: Comment / question re. Requirements for WCAG 2.0 Extensions
- Re[2]: Comment / question re. Requirements for WCAG 2.0 Extensions
Thursday, 4 February 2016
- CfC: Issue 150
- Re: Comment / question re. Requirements for WCAG 2.0 Extensions
- RE: Comment / question re. Requirements for WCAG 2.0 Extensions
- Re: Comment / question re. Requirements for WCAG 2.0 Extensions
- RE: Comment / question re. Requirements for WCAG 2.0 Extensions
- RE: Comment / question re. Requirements for WCAG 2.0 Extensions
- Re: Comment / question re. Requirements for WCAG 2.0 Extensions
Wednesday, 3 February 2016
- Comment / question re. Requirements for WCAG 2.0 Extensions
- Re: CfC: Change to introductory paragraphs
- RE: CfC: Change to introductory paragraphs
- RE: Change to introductory paragraphs
- Re: CfC: Change to introductory paragraphs
- Re: CfC: Change to introductory paragraphs
Tuesday, 2 February 2016
- Re: CfC: Change to introductory paragraphs
- RE: Change to introductory paragraphs
- Re: CfC: Change to introductory paragraphs
- Re: Change to introductory paragraphs
- RE: Change to introductory paragraphs
- CfC: Change to introductory paragraphs
- RE: IRC channel for Screenreader user questions
- RE: No WCAG meeting Tuesday
- IRC channel for Screenreader user questions
- No WCAG meeting Tuesday
Monday, 1 February 2016
- Re: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - ARIA? and How? - and SVG
- RE: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - ARIA? and How? - and SVG
- Re: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - ARIA? and How? - and SVG
- Re: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - ARIA? and How? - and SVG
- RE: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - ARIA? and How? - and SVG
- Re: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - ARIA? and How? - and SVG
- Re: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - ARIA? and How? - and SVG
- RE: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - ARIA? and How? - and SVG
- Re: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - ARIA? and How? - and SVG
- Re: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - ARIA? and How? - and SVG
- RE: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - ARIA? and How? -and SVG
- Re: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - ARIA? and How? - and SVG
- RE: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - ARIA? and How? - and SVG
- Re: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - ARIA? and How? - and SVG
Friday, 29 January 2016
- RE: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - ARIA? and How? - and SVG
- Re: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - ARIA? and How? - and SVG
- RE: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - ARIA? and How? - and SVG
- Re: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - ARIA? and How? - and SVG
- Re: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - ARIA? and How? - and SVG
- RE: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - ARIA? and How? - and SVG
Friday, 22 January 2016
Wednesday, 20 January 2016
Tuesday, 19 January 2016
Monday, 18 January 2016
Thursday, 14 January 2016
- Re: Issue 80 and F3
- Re: Issue 80 and F3
- RE: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - ARIA? and How? - and SVG
- Re: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - ARIA? and How? - and SVG
Wednesday, 13 January 2016
- Re: Issue 80 and F3
- Re: Issue 80 and F3
- Re: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - ARIA? and How? - and SVG
- RE: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - ARIA? and How? - and SVG
- RE: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - ARIA? and How? - and SVG
- RE: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - ARIA? and How? - and SVG
- RE: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - ARIA? and How? - and SVG
- RE: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - markup-wise
- RE: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - markup-wise
- RE: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - markup-wise
- Re: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - markup-wise
- Re: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - markup-wise
- RE: Question #2 on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers - markup-wise
- RE: Question on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers
- Issue 80 and F3
Tuesday, 12 January 2016
- Re: Question on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers
- Re: Question on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers
- Re: Question on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers
- Re: Question on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers
- RE: Question on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers
- Re: Question on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers
- Re: Question on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers
- Meeting minutes January 12 2016
- Question on 4.1.1 Parsing - what it covers
- WCAG-ACTION-318: Horton to look at new technique for disappearing background images.
- Re: WCAG Agenda January 12, 2016
- Re: Re[7]: Thoughts on pull request?
- Re: Re[7]: Thoughts on pull request?
- Re[7]: Thoughts on pull request?
- RE: Re[5]: Thoughts on pull request?
- Re[5]: Thoughts on pull request?
- Re[4]: Thoughts on pull request?
- RE: Re[2]: Thoughts on pull request?
- Re[2]: Thoughts on pull request?
- Re: Thoughts on pull request?
Monday, 11 January 2016
- Re: Thoughts on pull request?
- WCAG Agenda January 12, 2016
- Re: Thoughts on pull request?
- RE: Thoughts on pull request?
- Re: Thoughts on pull request?
- Re: Thoughts on pull request?
- Re: Thoughts on pull request?
- Re: Thoughts on pull request?
- Re: Thoughts on pull request?
- Re: Thoughts on pull request?
- Re: Thoughts on pull request?
- Re: Thoughts on pull request?
- Re: Thoughts on pull request?
- Re: Thoughts on pull request?
- Re: Thoughts on pull request?
- Contrast analysis and Pixel radius
- Thoughts on pull request?
Thursday, 7 January 2016
Wednesday, 6 January 2016
- Re: CfC: Publish Techniques and Understanding documents for public review
- Re: CfC: Publish Techniques and Understanding documents for public review
- Re: CfC: Publish Techniques and Understanding documents for public review
- Re: Publish Techniques and Understanding documents for public review
Tuesday, 5 January 2016
- Re: Publish Techniques and Understanding documents for public review
- RE: Publish Techniques and Understanding documents for public review
- Re: CfC: Publish Techniques and Understanding documents for public review
- RE: Publish Techniques and Understanding documents for public review
- Re: CfC: Publish Techniques and Understanding documents for public review
- RE: CFC - Publish Techniques and Understanding documents for public review
- Re: CfC: Publish Techniques and Understanding documents for public review
- CfC: Publish Techniques and Understanding documents for public review
- Meeting minutes January 5 2016
- Readability tests
- Re: WCAG Agenda 5th January 2016
- Re: WCAG Agenda 5th January 2016
- Re: WCAG Agenda 5th January 2016
- RE: RE: WCAG Agenda 5th January 2016
- Re: WCAG Agenda 5th January 2016
- RE: WCAG Agenda 5th January 2016
- Re: agenda+ Quickref was: Re: WCAG Agenda 5th January 2016
- agenda+ Quickref was: Re: WCAG Agenda 5th January 2016
- Re: WCAG Agenda 5th January 2016
- Re: WCAG Agenda 5th January 2016
- Re: RE: WCAG Agenda 5th January 2016
Monday, 4 January 2016
- Re: WCAG Agenda 5th January 2016
- RE: WCAG Agenda 5th January 2016
- RE: WCAG Agenda 5th January 2016
- Re: WCAG Agenda 5th January 2016
- Re: WCAG Agenda 5th January 2016
- Re: Re[2]: WCAG Agenda 5th January 2016
- Re[2]: WCAG Agenda 5th January 2016
- Re: WCAG Agenda 5th January 2016
- Re: WCAG Agenda 5th January 2016