W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > October to December 2016

Re[2]: Combining SCs

From: <josh@interaccess.ie>
Date: Tue, 04 Oct 2016 14:40:10 +0000
To: "John Foliot" <john.foliot@deque.com>, "Alastair Campbell" <acampbell@nomensa.com>
Cc: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, public-low-vision-a11y-tf <public-low-vision-a11y-tf@w3.org>
Message-Id: <ema1d32299-728e-40d9-8a4d-7792a075f53c@josh_machine>
------ Original Message ------
From: "John Foliot" <john.foliot@deque.com>
To: "Alastair Campbell" <acampbell@nomensa.com>
>
> > This isn’t worth spending a lot of time on now, we need to get all 
>the new SCs in a pot first and boil them down to the essentials, then 
>we can hash this out.

+10

J

>
>
>+1
>
>JF
>
>On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 12:07 PM, Alastair Campbell 
><acampbell@nomensa.com> wrote:
>>Katie wrote:
>>
>> > “Even though C restates with a higher requirement, it is still OK, I 
>>think, as long as each is testable. Because we can't remove or change 
>>1.4.4 so an entity would fail in 2.1 for that SC if they passes it in 
>>2.0.”
>>
>>
>>
>>I think if we could show that anything passing this 2.1 SC would also 
>>pass the 2.0 SC, I’d like to be able to replace the original. Apparent 
>>duplication would make the document harder to understand.
>>
>>
>>
>>However, we’re a little way off that decision point, we need to go 
>>through the process of agreeing the new ones first…
>>
>>
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>
>>
>>-Alastair
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>--
>John Foliot
>Principal Accessibility Strategist
>Deque Systems Inc.
>john.foliot@deque.com
>
>Advancing the mission of digital accessibility and inclusion
Received on Tuesday, 4 October 2016 14:37:47 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 21:08:06 UTC