Re: CfC: Change to introductory paragraphs

I am fine with the  change to the introduction.
I had a couple of comments and a question ...I'll post separately
Thanks,
Sailesh Panchang
Principal Accessibility Consultant
Deque Systems Inc
Phone 703-225-0380 ext 105
Mobile: 571-344-1765

On 2/3/16, Kathy Wahlbin <kathy@interactiveaccessibility.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> From: David MacDonald [mailto:david100@sympatico.ca]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2016 6:40 PM
> To: Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>
> Cc: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: CfC: Change to introductory paragraphs
>
> +1
>
>
> Cheers,
> David MacDonald
>
>
>
> CanAdapt Solutions Inc.
> Tel:  613.235.4902
>
> LinkedIn
> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>
>
> twitter.com/davidmacd<http://twitter.com/davidmacd>
>
> GitHub<https://github.com/DavidMacDonald>
>
> www.Can-Adapt.com<http://www.can-adapt.com/>
>
>
>
>   Adapting the web to all users
>             Including those with disabilities
>
> If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy
> policy<http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html>
>
> On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 12:23 PM, Andrew Kirkpatrick
> <akirkpat@adobe.com<mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com>> wrote:
> CALL FOR CONSENSUS – ends Thursday February 4 at 12:01pm Boston time.
>
> The WG discussed comments made about the introductory paragraphs in the
> Extension Requirements Document (https://www.w3.org/TR/wcag2-ext-req/).
> Concern was expressed about use of the term ‘optional’ with regard to the
> extensions. The Working Group discussed alternative language which is
> believed to address the concern, while at the same time not changing that
> the extensions will need to be explicitly required.  Authors who are
> required to conform with WCAG 2.0 will not need to conform to the
> requirements in the extensions unless they are also required to meet one or
> more extensions.
>
> You can view the changes here:
> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/commit/aeb3d4947490b1b026a229102fa73db12001be19?diff=split
>
> The rationale for this is that this is what is allowed under the WCAG WG
> charter.  Specifically, the charter allows the WG to "Develop normative WCAG
> 2.0 extensions and support materials to address special topic areas as
> needed without changing the meaning of conformance to WCAG 2.0 on its own”,
> and that is what this language is intended to convey. The Working Group will
> be exploring features needed in future versions of guidelines, again from
> the charter "Determine features needed in future WAI accessibility
> guidelines and publish requirements”, and we expect that the extension work
> will inform that effort.
>
> If you have concerns about this change in the document that have not been
> discussed already and feel that those concerns result in you “not being able
> to live with” this decision, please let the group know before the CfC
> deadline.
>
> Thanks,
> AWK
>
> Andrew Kirkpatrick
> Group Product Manager, Accessibility
> Adobe
>
> akirkpat@adobe.com<mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com>
> http://twitter.com/awkawk
> http://blogs.adobe.com/accessibility
>
>

Received on Wednesday, 3 February 2016 16:45:47 UTC