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

For this CFC +1 from me....

We can deal with the Understanding separately...

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 3:58 PM, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
wrote:

> 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*
>>>
>>
>>
>