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

Re: Issue 72: Proposed change in definition to "set of web pages"

From: David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2016 15:58:19 -0500
Message-ID: <CAAdDpDbnPom2k72ZHQrMFHgCchjg=NRxtYbTxd+jd+dG3yw-iA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>
Cc: josh <josh@interaccess.ie>, "jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com" <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
That's fine I think if there is an example in the definition and in the
Understanding of 2.1. At least we'll have clarity that WCAG 2 includes
online ePub.

Cheers,
David MacDonald



*Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*
Tel:  613.235.4902

LinkedIn
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>

twitter.com/davidmacd

GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald>

www.Can-Adapt.com <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>

On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 3:12 PM, Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>
wrote:

> CfC’s need to be a yes/no answer please.
>
> I’d hold off on the Understanding suggestion as it may be that we wind up
> with a single Understanding document that covers WCAG 2 (2.0 and 2.1).
>
> Thanks,
> AWK
>
> Andrew Kirkpatrick
> Group Product Manager, Standards and Accessibility
> Adobe
>
> akirkpat@adobe.com
> http://twitter.com/awkawk
>
> From: David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
> Date: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 at 14:52
> To: josh <josh@interaccess.ie>
> Cc: Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: Issue 72: Proposed change in definition to "set of web pages"
> Resent-From: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> Resent-Date: Tuesday, November 29, 2016 at 14:52
>
> For 2.0, we can't change a word of the normative document... but we can
> add the exact same example into the 2.0 Understanding doc that will be in
> the 2.1 glossary.
>
> So I propose a friendly amendment to have two changes.
> 1) Add the example to the 2.1 Glossary
> 2) Add the same example to the Understanding document for 2.0
>
> Cheers,
> David MacDonald
>
>
>
> *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*
> Tel:  613.235.4902
>
> LinkedIn
> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>
>
> twitter.com/davidmacd
>
> GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald>
>
> www.Can-Adapt.com <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>
>
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 1:56 PM, josh <josh@interaccess.ie> wrote:
>
>> Thanks Jon, yes. This is for 2.1.
>> Also people should feel free to review this issue for a little longer
>> than the scheduled deadline and comment etc.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Josh
>>
>> InterAccess - Accessible UX
>>
>> -------- Original message --------
>> From: Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com>
>> Date: 29/11/2016 18:14 (GMT+00:00)
>> To: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
>> Subject: RE: Issue 72: Proposed change in definition to "set of web
>> pages"
>>
>> Ø  On todays call with the DPUB working group, the suggested example
>> text was proposed to be added to the WCAG definition of a 'set of Webpages'
>> in order to better address the needs of DPUB stakeholders.
>>
>> Josh, to be clear, are we talking about this update for WCAG 2.1 or WCAG
>> 2.0.  For WCAG 2.0 since the whole definition section is normative I don’t
>> think we can it for 2.0 but for 2.1 it seems like it would be backwards
>> compatible.
>>
>>
>>
>> Jonathan
>>
>>
>>
>> Jonathan Avila
>>
>> Chief Accessibility Officer
>>
>> SSB BART Group
>>
>> jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com
>>
>> 703.637.8957 (Office)
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:*josh@interaccess.ie [mailto:josh@interaccess.ie]
>> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 29, 2016 12:47 PM
>> *To:* WCAG
>> *Subject:* CFC: Issue 72: Proposed change in definition to "set of web
>> pages"
>>
>>
>>
>> CALL FOR CONSENSUS – ends Thursday Dec 1st at 5:00pm Boston time.
>>
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> On todays call with the DPUB working group, the suggested example text
>> was proposed to be added to the WCAG definition of a 'set of Webpages' in
>> order to better address the needs of DPUB stakeholders.
>>
>> The current definition can be seen here:
>> https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#set-of-web-pagesdef
>>
>> DPUB Proposal for language: Example: A publication is split across
>> multiple Web pages, where each page contains one chapter or other
>> significant section of the work. The publication is logically a single
>> contiguous unit, and contains navigation features that enable access to the
>> full set of pages.
>>
>> The item was discussed on the WG call and positive responses were
>> proffered - (https://www.w3.org/2016/11/29-wai-wcag-minutes.html).
>>
>> The original issue on Github: https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/72
>>
>> If you have concerns about this proposed consensus position that have not
>> been discussed already and feel that those concerns result in you “not
>> being able to live with” this position, please let the group know before
>> the CfC deadline.
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>>
>>
>> Joshue O Connor | Director
>>
>> *InterAccess.ie - Accessible UX*
>>
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 29 November 2016 20:58:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 21:08:07 UTC