RE: We should not separate outt at risk SC

Hi John

I am referring to the draft of wcag 2.1 that is not yet written

The proposal is to have an "at risk section" for any SC that have issues with it and have not passed the consensus that it has met the acceptance criteria.  I think we should just have any these SC in the main part of the draft with the "todo" editors notes. We can  even specify that if these issues are not resolved then these SCs are at risk. 

All the best

Lisa Seeman

LinkedIn, Twitter

---- On Mon, 06 Feb 2017 17:10:57 +0200  Rochford<> wrote ---- 

    Hi Lisa,
 The draft in the main section of which document? Would you please provide its URL? Thank you.
 John Rochford
 UMass Medical School/E.K. Shriver Center
 Director, INDEX Program
 Instructor, Family Medicine & Community Health
 Twitter: @ClearHelper
 Confidentiality Notice:
 This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential, proprietary, and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately and destroy or permanently delete all copies of the original message.
   From: lisa.seeman [] 
 Sent: Sunday, February 5, 2017 3:05 PM
 To: W3c-Wai-Gl-Request@W3. Org <>
 Subject: We should not separate outt at risk SC
  Hi Folks
  Can we have  any "at risk" SC  placed in the draft in the main section with an editors note with the issues that need to be addressed. I do not think they should be a separate "at risk " section.
  Firstly it is not necessary in a first working draft. This high speed processing of SC does not make it easy to resolve trick issues, and what is needed is time and effort. 
  However if they are in a section at the end they will look downgraded, the readers will ignore them, when in fact they are the very SC that we need feedback for. 
  All the best

Received on Tuesday, 7 February 2017 16:27:19 UTC