RE: new wording for Undo

From: lisa.seeman []
Sent: Sunday, July 16, 2017 12:50 PM

UNDO: Users can undo actions, return to the previous context and correct data entry without loss of non-dependent data except when:
[Jason] Is there a definition of “non-dependent” (should that be “independent” or something more descriptive)? data?
Is it always clear what constitutes the previous context? I’m not sure this is testable. It also isn’t apparent whether the term “the previous context” (implying that there’s only one at any given time) is meant to have this implication, but that’s what the proposal above says.

  *   allowing the user to undo an action or maintaining data may cause harm such as adding risk to the user privacy or security;
[Jason] Is this reliably testable, or instead, should the users be required to “opt in” to this functionality?

  *   the user has confirmed an action;
  *   allowing the user to undo an action may interfere with the essential function of the content;
[Jason] “may” seems rather vague here. Shouldn’t this be expressed in terms of “invalidating the activity”, as is done elsewhere in WCAG?

  *   the action can no longer be controlled by the site;
[Jason] The site never controls the action, so I don’t know what this means. As it stands, it’s probably not reliably testable and it’s very vague. It should be removed or clarified.

  *   the user has been idle for 24 hours.


This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for whom it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and delete it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited.

Thank you for your compliance.


Received on Monday, 17 July 2017 15:16:23 UTC