Re: Coming to a decision on 2.2

Alistair,

To your question "If some reference WCAG 2 and some don’t, how would the
non-WCAG ones be numbered?"  -if we were going with my suggested possible
scenario, it would be connected to its most relevant Guideline, or failing
that, Principle.

Katie Haritos-Shea
703-371-5545
On Feb 23, 2016 2:22 AM, "Alastair Campbell" <acampbell@nomensa.com> wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> I opened up my WCAG folder this morning and found this huge thread, to
> summarise my thoughts on the naming convention / document process:
>
>    - I agree with John’s wish for a living doc, but appreciate Katie’s
>    point that it doesn’t work for some major consumers of WCAG.
>    - I agree that saying “this extra SC for low vision users” doesn’t
>    stand much chance of being used in practice if it isn’t part of the main
>    WCAG document.
>    - Given the constraints, I think it best if extra SC are documented by
>    task forces, tested by the wider community, scrutinised for clashes across
>    extensions, and then rolled into WCAG as a major update in the medium term
>    (perhaps for the next chartering?).
>    - It would be very useful to reference WCAG 2.0 SC from the
>    extensions, but I’m wary of 1.3.1-LV or similar. If some reference WCAG 2
>    and some don’t, how would the non-WCAG ones be numbered? Perhaps each SC
>    from a task force should have it’s own numbering with a clear means of
>    referencing the original.
>
> On the text for 2.2, perhaps it would be best to drop the concept of
> modifying altogether?
>
> In all the examples I’ve seen so far, a new SC from a task force would
> extend or add to WCAG2. If it cannot undermine the original SC, then how
> can it modify it? It isn’t modifying it, it is adding or extending it… just
> drop the last bullet point.
>
> Is there an example where a new SC could modify an original one without
> undermining it? An example where it couldn’t just be treated as adding or
> extending?
>
> -Alastair
>
> --
>
>
> Alastair Campbell
>
>
>
> www.nomensa.com
>
> follow us: @we_are_nomensa or me: @alastc
>