Simple SC numbers

All,

I'm onboard the camp to de-emphasize the outline numbering and instead assign ID numbers to SC which can be referred to in regulations, tools, reports, etc.  However, I think we need to keep those IDs very simple and flexible so that any future rearrangement or modification does not disrupt understanding or references.  To that end, I would propose a scheme similar to the one already used to number techniques, i.e. 1, 2, 3, etc., and the initial assignment would make it clear there is no meaning to the ID.  The advantages of simplicity here are:

*       Changing conformance levels would never be a numbering issue

*       Moving or changing guidelines or principles would never be a numbering issue

*       Card-sorting to improve reading flow (as suggested by Laura) also not a future issue

*       Removing an SC would not be an issue - just don't use that ID ever again

*       Can refer to the "former" numbers as long as is necessary and no changes have been made, e.g. SC #1 (formerly 1.1.1)

*       Optionally could use the IDs as a versioning prefix (or give each criterion a version number).  For example, SC #19.1 would note that #19 has undergone a change not substantial enough to warrant a new ID

I threw up a branch and did a random round-robin to assign numbers to 19 criteria as a quick mockup, which can be viewed at:
http://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/criterion-identifiers/guidelines/

Two important notes:

1.       The outline numbers in the SC headings would be removed, but I could not figure out how to do that (a Respec config thing I assume)

2.       Styling and wording of the ID numbers was not really paid attention to here.  If anyone would like to volunteer to make it prettier, go ahead.

Steve Repsher
Twitter<https://twitter.com/steverep> | LinkedIn<https://www.linkedin.com/in/steverepsherjr/> | GitHub<https://github.com/steverep>