- From: <josh@interaccess.ie>
- Date: Wed, 17 May 2017 11:51:53 +0000
- To: "Laura Carlson" <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com>, "Andrew Kirkpatrick" <akirkpat@adobe.com>
- Cc: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
+1 ------ Original Message ------ From: "Laura Carlson" <laura.lee.carlson@gmail.com> To: "Andrew Kirkpatrick" <akirkpat@adobe.com> Cc: "WCAG" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org> Sent: 17/05/2017 12:12:28 Subject: Re: Errata on WCAG 2.0 1.3.3 and 1.4.1 >+1 > >Kindest Regards, >Laura > >On 5/16/17, Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com> wrote: >> Gregg suggested (correctly, I believe) that the original intent of >>1.3.3 and >> 1.4.1 is being misunderstood due to the language of the notes. >> >> The suggestion is to remove the notes for both SC and the explicitly >>add >> “color” to the list of sensory characteristics in 1.3.3: >> >> 1.3.3 Sensory Characteristics: Instructions provided for >>understanding and >> operating content do not rely solely on sensory characteristics of >> components such as shape, size, @@color,@@ visual location, >>orientation, or >> sound. >> >> Color is clearly a sensory characteristic, so we could also just >>handle the >> addition of “color” in the understanding document but I think that >>given >> that color is explicitly discussed in 1.4.1 it may decrease possible >> misunderstandings. >> >> Step one is to add this to the errata document. Step two would be to >> implement the change in the WCAG 2.1 release. >> >> What do people think? >> >> Thanks, >> AWK >> >> Andrew Kirkpatrick >> Group Product Manager, Accessibility >> Adobe >> >> akirkpat@adobe.com >> http://twitter.com/awkawk >> > > >-- >Laura L. Carlson >
Received on Wednesday, 17 May 2017 11:47:55 UTC