RE: Should we drop any WCAG 2 SCs in 2.1?

Ø  I think this question has merit, and is related to the question of what SCs are showing their age, and/or are things that are just not substantial fails (or may not represent significant a11y issues any more).

I don’t think we should/can remove or deprioritize anything for SC 2.1.  IMO all SC still have some relevance.

Jonathan


From: josh@interaccess.ie [mailto:josh@interaccess.ie]
Sent: Friday, July 15, 2016 12:56 AM
To: David MacDonald; WCAG; Jeanne Spellman
Subject: Re: Should we drop any WCAG 2 SCs in 2.1?


------ Original Message ------
From: "David MacDonald" <david100@sympatico.ca<mailto:david100@sympatico.ca>>
[...]

Are there any SCs that have been overcome sufficiently by the environment, OS, User Agents etc. that we can remove them without breaking the acceptance requirement of WCAG 2.1 that meeting it also meets 2.0?
I think this question has merit, and is related to the question of what SCs are showing their age, and/or are things that are just not substantial fails (or may not represent significant a11y issues any more).

Thanks

Josh


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>

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>