RE: Minor editorial proposal for WCAG 2.1: use of ordered vs unordered lists in SC text

I don’t have a strong opinion about this, but having numbers to refer to seems better than always having to say, or write, for example “third item in success criterion x.y.z”.

From: David MacDonald [mailto:david100@sympatico.ca]
Sent: Wednesday, August 2, 2017 1:35 PM
To: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
Cc: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Minor editorial proposal for WCAG 2.1: use of ordered vs unordered lists in SC text

I support numbers, unless there is a compelling reason not to on certain SCs, although right now I can't think of any good reasons off hand.


Cheers,
David MacDonald



CanAdapt Solutions Inc.

Tel:  613.235.4902

LinkedIn
<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fin%2Fdavidmacdonald100&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Ce420dc290f544391c0cf08d4d9cd0ca8%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636372922095259362&sdata=IvHGEBAjaR2Yeh8V8YwIAvWvbg2IYjVme%2Flfzsz6h%2B8%3D&reserved=0>

twitter.com/davidmacd<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fdavidmacd&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Ce420dc290f544391c0cf08d4d9cd0ca8%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636372922095259362&sdata=NrnRe%2FabhA5NHPg9%2B8MK405AMFCDVkJJyG8gKJlMnyw%3D&reserved=0>

GitHub<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FDavidMacDonald&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Ce420dc290f544391c0cf08d4d9cd0ca8%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636372922095259362&sdata=lK2MTl%2F05TExQMt2fXjHjMT%2B5If02VVMIL6PBv%2FfGhY%3D&reserved=0>

www.Can-Adapt.com<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.can-adapt.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Ce420dc290f544391c0cf08d4d9cd0ca8%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636372922095259362&sdata=Ky7e%2FAaoIuhesmw%2FYQZDAsavFw%2BtcEqTn1wOWWsq4XM%3D&reserved=0>



  Adapting the web to all users
            Including those with disabilities

If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidmacd.com%2Fdisclaimer.html&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Ce420dc290f544391c0cf08d4d9cd0ca8%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636372922095259362&sdata=B1jjZz24rhRJLAYe3XjjW%2BZh5iAWWujV%2Bj%2Bnu3AJ8NY%3D&reserved=0>

On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 1:28 PM, Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk<mailto:redux@splintered.co.uk>> wrote:
On 02/08/2017 13:41, David MacDonald wrote:
I support the use of numbered lists because it allows the bullets to be referenced to like this 3.3.4.2, or 3.3.4 #2

So...are you advocating changing all other non-numbered/bulleted lists to numbered ones? Or just leaving the weird inconsistency as is?

P
Cheers,
David MacDonald

*Can**Adapt**Solutions Inc.*

Tel:  613.235.4902<tel:613.235.4902>

LinkedIn
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fin%2Fdavidmacdonald100&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Ce420dc290f544391c0cf08d4d9cd0ca8%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636372922095259362&sdata=IvHGEBAjaR2Yeh8V8YwIAvWvbg2IYjVme%2Flfzsz6h%2B8%3D&reserved=0>>

twitter.com/davidmacd<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fdavidmacd&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Ce420dc290f544391c0cf08d4d9cd0ca8%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636372922095259362&sdata=NrnRe%2FabhA5NHPg9%2B8MK405AMFCDVkJJyG8gKJlMnyw%3D&reserved=0> <http://twitter.com/davidmacd<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fdavidmacd&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Ce420dc290f544391c0cf08d4d9cd0ca8%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636372922095259362&sdata=NrnRe%2FabhA5NHPg9%2B8MK405AMFCDVkJJyG8gKJlMnyw%3D&reserved=0>>

GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FDavidMacDonald&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Ce420dc290f544391c0cf08d4d9cd0ca8%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636372922095259362&sdata=lK2MTl%2F05TExQMt2fXjHjMT%2B5If02VVMIL6PBv%2FfGhY%3D&reserved=0>>

www.Can-Adapt.com<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.Can-Adapt.com&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Ce420dc290f544391c0cf08d4d9cd0ca8%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636372922095259362&sdata=o8AygUvFhgBuPvuhYZNTijhh1BRDsV09V1LRdoNKxh8%3D&reserved=0> <http://www.can-adapt.com/<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.can-adapt.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Ce420dc290f544391c0cf08d4d9cd0ca8%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636372922095259362&sdata=Ky7e%2FAaoIuhesmw%2FYQZDAsavFw%2BtcEqTn1wOWWsq4XM%3D&reserved=0>>

/  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<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidmacd.com%2Fdisclaimer.html&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Ce420dc290f544391c0cf08d4d9cd0ca8%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636372922095259362&sdata=B1jjZz24rhRJLAYe3XjjW%2BZh5iAWWujV%2Bj%2Bnu3AJ8NY%3D&reserved=0>>

On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 7:34 AM, Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk<mailto:redux@splintered.co.uk> <mailto:redux@splintered.co.uk<mailto:redux@splintered.co.uk>>> wrote:

    On 02/08/2017 10:15, Patrick H. Lauke wrote:

    [...]

        SCs with ordered/numbered lists: 1.4.8, 3.3.4, 3.3.6

        I'd suggest changing the ordered lists to unordered would make
        most sense. And as I don't believe this change alters the
        meaning of the SCs' normative text, this is purely
        editorial/non-substantive.


    Addendum: I can see the potential argument that in the case of 1.4.8
    numbered list was used to emphasise that all of those conditions
    need to be true. However, that's not the case for 3.3.4 and 3.3.6
    (they're "at least one..." type lists there).

    And if 3.3.4 and 3.3.6 were changed to unordered lists (to match all
    other instances of "at least one..." type lists), then 1.4.8 would
    be the only numbered list, so I'd argue it should also be changed to
    unordered, perhaps strengthening the prose before the list instead
    to emphasise that ALL conditions must be met.


    P
    --     Patrick H. Lauke

    www.splintered.co.uk<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.splintered.co.uk&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Ce420dc290f544391c0cf08d4d9cd0ca8%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636372922095259362&sdata=WLrsej76tFQfxOdUT%2F4de1g4iBAA%2FKJlpT5Bsz7irJo%3D&reserved=0> <http://www.splintered.co.uk<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.splintered.co.uk&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Ce420dc290f544391c0cf08d4d9cd0ca8%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636372922095259362&sdata=WLrsej76tFQfxOdUT%2F4de1g4iBAA%2FKJlpT5Bsz7irJo%3D&reserved=0>> |
    https://github.com/patrickhlauke<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fpatrickhlauke&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Ce420dc290f544391c0cf08d4d9cd0ca8%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636372922095259362&sdata=hdDX9K8oTT%2Fu3T9pcaYdixT8hP3vT1GC46HF02K0Sr8%3D&reserved=0> <https://github.com/patrickhlauke<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fpatrickhlauke&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Ce420dc290f544391c0cf08d4d9cd0ca8%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636372922095259362&sdata=hdDX9K8oTT%2Fu3T9pcaYdixT8hP3vT1GC46HF02K0Sr8%3D&reserved=0>>
    http://flickr.com/photos/redux/<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fflickr.com%2Fphotos%2Fredux%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Ce420dc290f544391c0cf08d4d9cd0ca8%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636372922095259362&sdata=6fq0SbedL5ntKFCqjyNfRpbZigPg1FC%2F%2FlkazynF8EU%3D&reserved=0> <http://flickr.com/photos/redux/<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fflickr.com%2Fphotos%2Fredux%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Ce420dc290f544391c0cf08d4d9cd0ca8%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636372922095259362&sdata=6fq0SbedL5ntKFCqjyNfRpbZigPg1FC%2F%2FlkazynF8EU%3D&reserved=0>> |
    http://redux.deviantart.com<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fredux.deviantart.com&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Ce420dc290f544391c0cf08d4d9cd0ca8%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636372922095259362&sdata=wdHJMxiB9itzcCp9ZJhaOOhTVTKR8UmgZ5VxolxBWvk%3D&reserved=0>
    twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke



--
Patrick H. Lauke

www.splintered.co.uk<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.splintered.co.uk&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Ce420dc290f544391c0cf08d4d9cd0ca8%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636372922095259362&sdata=WLrsej76tFQfxOdUT%2F4de1g4iBAA%2FKJlpT5Bsz7irJo%3D&reserved=0> | https://github.com/patrickhlauke<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fpatrickhlauke&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Ce420dc290f544391c0cf08d4d9cd0ca8%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636372922095259362&sdata=hdDX9K8oTT%2Fu3T9pcaYdixT8hP3vT1GC46HF02K0Sr8%3D&reserved=0>
http://flickr.com/photos/redux/<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fflickr.com%2Fphotos%2Fredux%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Ce420dc290f544391c0cf08d4d9cd0ca8%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636372922095259362&sdata=6fq0SbedL5ntKFCqjyNfRpbZigPg1FC%2F%2FlkazynF8EU%3D&reserved=0> | http://redux.deviantart.com<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fredux.deviantart.com&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Ce420dc290f544391c0cf08d4d9cd0ca8%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636372922095259362&sdata=wdHJMxiB9itzcCp9ZJhaOOhTVTKR8UmgZ5VxolxBWvk%3D&reserved=0>
twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke


________________________________

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 Wednesday, 2 August 2017 20:29:29 UTC