- From: Laura Carlson <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2016 11:30:41 -0600
- To: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
- Cc: Katie Haritos-Shea GMAIL <ryladog@gmail.com>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Hi Alastair, > Laura wrote: > >> Move IDs to the end of each SC > > Thanks, I also have difficulty remembering the numbers. Well, past 1.1.1 > anyway! The 20/21 thing stumped me for a second, but I can see that having > the dot separator (2.1) would make it too ‘dotty’. Yes. Too many dots is confusing. > Having “ID: 1.4.4(20)” and “ID: 1.4(21)4” implies the 2.1 is replacing the > previous, but in which case why have both? Good point. I was thinking it would be forward compatible to 2.2 if that was ever needed. But I think you solved it with your next suggestion. > Perhaps it could be something like “ID 2.0: 1.4.7”, “ID 2.1: 1.4.8“. Yes. That could work. > Overall though, I do like the idea of de-emphasising the IDs, it makes the > ordering more flexible. It becomes an enhancement for experts, toolmakers > and legal use, without confusing the largest group who (should) use the > guidelines. Agreed. De-emphasising the numbers was my main point. Kindest Regards, Laura -- Laura L. Carlson
Received on Wednesday, 21 December 2016 17:31:15 UTC