- From: White, Jason J <jjwhite@ets.org>
- Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 15:21:07 +0000
- To: "josh@interaccess.ie" <josh@interaccess.ie>, Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <BY2PR0701MB199035849F2DF84D1192C602AB120@BY2PR0701MB1990.namprd07.prod.outlook.>
From: josh@interaccess.ie [mailto:josh@interaccess.ie] Sent: Monday, August 15, 2016 10:35 AM A substantive suggestion: in item 4, where a new Guideline is needed, perhaps it should be proposed separately and then referred to by each Success Criterion proposal that is related to it. Sorry Jason, I don't understand how this idea is different from the current process? I feel like I'm missing something here! It maybe obvious, but please clarify your reasoning for me. [Jason] The suggestion was that, instead of proposing a new guideline as part of the proposal for each success criterion that requires it, there should be one proposal for the new Guideline that is then referred to in each success criterion proposal that would fall under it. That is, Guideline proposals would be separate and distinct from Success Criteria proposals. Does this help to clarify the issue? ________________________________ This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for whom it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and delete it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited. Thank you for your compliance. ________________________________
Received on Monday, 15 August 2016 15:21:38 UTC