Re: Acceptance Criteria for proposals for new Success Criteria

2.Be testable through automated or manual processes.
[Jason] They should be as reliably testable as possible, while achieving their intended purpose and benefit.

Why is this significant?  If a criterion doesn’t achieve the intended purpose then it won’t be accepted.
[Jason] It’s significant in that it explicitly states the trade-off that success criterion writers need to consider. Making a requirement more reliably testable can easily occur at the expense of achieving its goals, and thus I am proposing to acknowledge the balancing which needs to be done.

Ah, I see.  I don’t think that will work.  Testability is an absolute requirement.  If an SC isn’t testable then it won’t become an SC, as it was with WCAG 2.0.  Worth noting that there is a difference between “testable” and “machine testable” and this covers both.

6.Apply to all content, unless specific exceptions are included in the success criteria (e.g. "except interruptions involving an emergency").
[Jason] Where a success criterion applies to only some types of content or only under specific conditions, such conditions should be stated explicitly (e.g., “If non-text content is time-based media”).

I think that your change says the same thing, but doesn’t work with the structure of the prompt, so leaving as is.
[Jason] Exceptions and explicitly stated conditions aren’t the same thing, in my view, hence I do not think it should be left as is.

I’m not sure what I’m missing.  The original text says that if there are exceptions that they needs to be included in the SC.  That is explicitly mentioning them, isn’t it?

AWK