- From: David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
- Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2017 20:38:58 -0500
- To: "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>
- Cc: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAAdDpDbf5s+9Af3M4LEZRcdRQC8WcPO8uiiFcX1Fd+mvBPa1wA@mail.gmail.com>
I think it depends on the technology stack that is relied upon for conformance. 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 Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 8:22 PM, Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk> wrote: > On 13/01/2017 00:10, Alastair Campbell wrote: > >> JF wrote: >> >>> a significant re-write is likely in order, as that is not at all >>> clear from the current draft text, which states that (for the >>> author) a mechanism be provided (actually, "a mechanism is >>> available") - which suggests to me that it is the responsibility >>> of the author to provide that mechanism. >>> >> >> I get that people aren't understanding that the intent is that it >> could be via user-agent, I didn't to start with either. However, >> don't you want to keep the WCAG 2.0 approach? >> >> This is language directly taken from 2.0, used in bypass blocks, >> audio control, link purpose, unusual words, error prevention, and >> more at AAA. >> >> Mechanism is defined in WCAG, and the (normative) note underneath >> is: "Note 1: The mechanism may be explicitly provided in the content, >> or may be relied upon to be provided by either the platform or by >> user agents, including assistive technologies." >> >> If that isn't suitable, what would you suggest? Can we sort it out in >> the Understanding doc? >> >> I think we're retiring Line length, but the point is the same for >> several others, so it is worth hashing out. >> > > The disconnect for me comes when UAs/platforms that don't provide that > particular functionality/mechanism are then also excluded...so effectively > we're saying "a mechanism for X should be available, which in most cases is > already taken care of by the UA, except this SC doesn't apply if the UA > doesn't provide this sort of mechanism"? > > P > > -- > Patrick H. Lauke > > www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke > http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com > twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke > >
Received on Friday, 13 January 2017 01:39:33 UTC