- From: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
- Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2017 09:18:10 +0000
- To: John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <20903044-899F-4994-ABD6-434C8C589646@nomensa.com>
Hi John, Michael’s comment got a bit garbled by github’s editor, I updated that in the pull request [1] and re-copied it in below. The particular understanding doc was graphics contrast [2], which is particularly long and replete with examples to convey the meaning of the SC text. (And recently updated if anyone would like to have a look!) Given that many of the SCs are more complex than those in 2.0 (otherwise they would have been included in 2.0), I guess this will happen for more SC. Due to the volume it makes sense to have sub-headings in the Intent, which then makes the Benefits a bit lost. I also found it difficult to write the benefits without re-stating the start of the intent. I had several comments that the start needed to be improved by saying why you want to do this, which is the benefits! If we make a change, I’d suggest either starting the intent with benefits, or dropping it and making sure we include the benefits at the top of the intent. Cheers, -Alastair 1] https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/pull/500 2] https://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/graphics-contrast/understanding/21/graphics-contrast.html From: John Foliot FWIW, I agree with Micheal that promoting Benefits to sibling of Intent has a positive benefit, and I'd support that idea going forward. Could we strike up a straw poll around this, to take an internal temperature of the WG? Chairs? JF On Oct 11, 2017 10:15 AM, "michael-n-cooper" <notifications@github.com<mailto:notifications@github.com>> wrote: @michael-n-cooper commented on this pull request. Reviewing structurally only: my major comment is that where new headings beyond the template are introduced, the heading and content related to that heading should be enclosed in a <section>element. This would be used for script processing such as generating TOC, or style, referencing, etc. Having a bunch of new <h3> in the Intent section causes the Benefits section to get lost in the shuffle. However, I've been wondering if we should promote Benefits to be a sibling of Intent rather than a child of it (in spite of the structure that was used for WCAG 2.0 Understanding), so this may trigger the answer into a "yes, that matters" state. — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub<https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/pull/500#pullrequestreview-68622080>, or mute the thread<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABK-cwUY6LEdWKA2ubBDqyNohZm4Qg63ks5srM2agaJpZM4PzJme>.
Received on Friday, 13 October 2017 09:19:39 UTC