Re: Word count of New SC compared to WCAG 2

On 03/01/2017 19:17, Katie Haritos-Shea GMAIL wrote:
> Then *how* are we going to expect getting feedback and ideas on testing
> and techniques on those items that might be ‘At Risk’?

What do you mean by at risk?

Léonie.


-- 
@LeonieWatson tink.uk Carpe diem




>
>
>
> ​​​​​** katie **
>
>
>
> *Katie Haritos-Shea**
> **Principal ICT Accessibility Architect (WCAG/Section 508/ADA/AODA)*
>
>
>
> *Cell: 703-371-5545 **|****ryladog@gmail.com*
> <mailto:ryladog@gmail.com>***|****Oakton, VA **|****LinkedIn Profile*
> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/katieharitosshea/>***|****Office:
> 703-371-5545 **|****@ryladog* <https://twitter.com/Ryladog>*
>
> *NOTE: The content of this email should be construed to always be an
> expression of my own personal independent opinion, unless I identify
> that I am speaking on behalf of Knowbility, as their AC Rep at the W3C -
> and - that my personal email never expresses the opinion of my employer,
> Deque Systems.**
>
>
>
> *From:*David MacDonald [mailto:david100@sympatico.ca]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 3, 2017 1:42 PM
> *To:* Léonie Watson <tink@tink.uk>
> *Cc:* WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> *Subject:* Re: Word count of New SC compared to WCAG 2
>
>
>
>>>The FPWD does not need to include all the proposed SC. It only needs
> to include those SC that have been reviewed and categorised by the time
> the FPWD is expected. Other SC can be added incrementally to subsequent
> WD as/when.
>
>
>
>
>
> ​That makes sense to me.
>
>
>
>
> Cheers,
> David MacDonald
>
>
>
> *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*
>
> Tel:  613.235.4902
>
> LinkedIn
> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>
>
> twitter.com/davidmacd <http://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, Jan 3, 2017 at 1:33 PM, Léonie Watson <tink@tink.uk
> <mailto:tink@tink.uk>> wrote:
>
>     On 03/01/2017 18:06, David MacDonald wrote:
>
>         but I'm concerned that the world is watching for WCAG next, and
>         has been
>         waiting over 8 years. Is this the first thing we want to release to
>         these stakeholders in 8 years?
>
>
>     No.
>
>
>         I think we may want to postpone our release date for the FPWD,
>         until we
>         can parse these, figure out how we are going to organize them
>         and make
>         some preliminary vetting.
>
>
>     The FPWD does not need to include all the proposed SC. It only needs
>     to include those SC that have been reviewed and categorised by the
>     time the FPWD is expected. Other SC can be added incrementally to
>     subsequent WD as/when.
>
>     Please don't consider delaying the timeline. Eight years is far too
>     long as it is - let's not make it worse.
>
>     Léonie.
>
>
>     --
>     @LeonieWatson tink.uk <http://tink.uk> Carpe diem
>
>
>

Received on Tuesday, 3 January 2017 19:56:09 UTC