Re: Regarding issue issue #376

I don’t think that is an option for us. Michael may be able to say otherwise, but in general it is unwise to reference an definition from a non-REC-document because even if we think that it is unlikely to change, it could.

@patricklauke – when is the updated Rec expected?


Andrew Kirkpatrick
Group Product Manager, Accessibility

From: David MacDonald <<>>
Date: Friday, September 15, 2017 at 06:12
To: WCAG <<>>
Subject: Regarding issue issue #376
Resent-From: WCAG <<>>
Resent-Date: Friday, September 15, 2017 at 06:13

I've reviewed the comment which is asking the group to consider having one definition of pointer events rather than having references to the first version of pointer events any other definition point to the second. Patrick explained that the new pointer events version is in first public working draft. And if it's possible to reference that, given that it's moving towards full acceptance, that would be preferable.

I agree with that sentiment. I don't see any logistical reason why we can't reference the latest definition, as long as it's consistent and will not change. I think even if it undergoes minor changes there's very little risk of it becoming a problem for our definition of pointer events.

I would like to propose that we reference the latest version of pointer events for all references, and close the issue.

David MacDonald

CanAdapt Solutions Inc.

Tel:  613.235.4902



  Adapting the web to all users

            Including those with disabilities

If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy<>

Received on Friday, 15 September 2017 14:26:36 UTC