Re[2]: User agent SCs?

------ 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