- From: <josh@interaccess.ie>
- Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2016 12:02:20 +0000
- To: "Laura Carlson" <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
- Cc: "Alastair Campbell" <acampbell@nomensa.com>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
------ Original Message ------ From: "Laura Carlson" <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com> [...] >Thanks Josh. That is useful to know. > >The Low Vision Task Force has used our Accessibility Requirements for >People with Low Vision (User Needs Document) doc [1] to create a Gap >Analysis (WCAG & UAAG) [2]. > >We are starting to work through the the Gap Analysis to develop >Success Criteria via Github issues [3]. > >It seems to me quite a few of the LVTF User Needs that start with >"Users can" will end up in Silver. Great - good to know. Thanks Josh > >Kindest Regards, >Laura > >[1] http://w3c.github.io/low-vision-a11y-tf/requirements.html >[2] https://w3c.github.io/low-vision-a11y-tf/WC-UA-alignment.html >[3] https://github.com/w3c/low-vision-SC/issues > > > >On 7/6/16, josh@interaccess.ie <josh@interaccess.ie> wrote: >> Great question Alastair! Yes, we mark them as for 'Silver'. >> >> It is very useful to know which SCs are more applicable to the UA >>space. >> >> Thanks a mil >> >> Josh >> >> ------ Original Message ------ >> From: "Alastair Campbell" <acampbell@nomensa.com> >> To: "WCAG" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org> >> Sent: 06/07/2016 12:03:40 >> Subject: User agent SCs? >> >>>Hi everyone, >>> >>> >>> >>>I’ve started looking through some of the task force success criteria >>>proposals and I have a high-level question: What do we do with SCs >>>that >>>seem best dealt with by user-agents? >>> >>> >>> >>>Just as an example, several of the low vision ones [1] definitely >>>seem >>>to be user-agent issues, such as the user being able to select >>>line/word/letter spacing, justification, margins on text, etc. I >>>assume >>>other TFs will also have SCs best dealt with on the user-agent side. >>> >>> >>> >>>Are they likely to be moved back to post-WCAG 2.1? >>> >>> >>> >>>My intent was to try and see the shape forming from the new >>>requirements, what kind of things are coming up and where are they >>>fitting in to the 2.0 “POUR” structure. However, that’s tricky when >>>you >>>don’t think they should be in WCAG, but we also don’t have a UAAG >>>anymore… >>> >>> >>> >>>Is it worth tagging these as user-agent focused in the meantime? >>> >>> >>> >>>Cheers, >>> >>> >>> >>>-Alastair >>> >>> >>> >>>1] https://github.com/w3c/low-vision-SC/issues >>> >>> >>> >>>-- >>> >>> >>> >>>Alastair Campbell >>> >>> >>> >>>www.nomensa.com >>> >>>follow us: @we_are_nomensa or me: @alastc >>> > > >-- >Laura L. Carlson
Received on Wednesday, 6 July 2016 12:00:24 UTC