Re: Re[2]: Errata on WCAG 2.0 1.3.3 and 1.4.1

+1

Sent from my iPad

> On May 17, 2017, at 7:48 AM, "josh@interaccess.ie" <josh@interaccess.ie> wrote:
>
> +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 12:13:16 UTC