W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > October to December 2017

Re: CFC - Update SC text Purpose of Controls

From: Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 21:16:19 +0000
To: John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com>, "Repsher, Stephen J" <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com>
CC: Joshue O Connor <josh@interaccess.ie>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20E25979-D400-43E9-8553-1BA4455F6964@adobe.com>
Before anyone else replies to the CFC, please note that it has been cancelled…


Andrew Kirkpatrick
Group Product Manager, Accessibility


From: John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com>
Date: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 at 15:39
To: "Repsher, Stephen J" <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com>
Cc: Joshue O Connor <josh@interaccess.ie>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: Re: CFC - Update SC text Purpose of Controls
Resent-From: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Resent-Date: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 at 15:38

-1 - I cannot live with this as presented today.

I have to agree with Steve, without specific definitions of which controls, this SC language has no real scope - which was a significant reason for splitting this out from the original "Support Personalization" proposed SC in the first place - scoping the requirement to a fixed list of page controls, as opposed to applying Personalization(-like semantics to all major blocks of content on the page, which is the current AAA Contextual Information proposed SC).

Additionally, because of that lack of scope, it leaves the intended controls undefined, and leaves content authors without "the list" of controls they need to be marking up: a recipe for disaster from my perspective.

I'd like to propose yet another draft:

"In content implemented using markup languages, the purpose of <ins>specific</ins> user interface components that serve a conventional purpose can be programmatically determined."

...and then link to the final defined <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdrive.google.com%2Ffile%2Fd%2F0B8dsTwtY5GvmMGplTUY4UmZzX3M%2Fview%3Fusp%3Dsharing&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cdbd51f43da454bce3d7f08d5311ff459%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636468935674704849&sdata=6eboX5F53xZ0Lk2Q6l1hq%2BvIhYyuhoTzS8%2B1WE%2FJy%2FI%3D&reserved=0>
​ normative​<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdrive.google.com%2Ffile%2Fd%2F0B8dsTwtY5GvmMGplTUY4UmZzX3M%2Fview%3Fusp%3Dsharing&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cdbd51f43da454bce3d7f08d5311ff459%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636468935674704849&sdata=6eboX5F53xZ0Lk2Q6l1hq%2BvIhYyuhoTzS8%2B1WE%2FJy%2FI%3D&reserved=0>
list of controls<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdrive.google.com%2Ffile%2Fd%2F0B8dsTwtY5GvmMGplTUY4UmZzX3M%2Fview%3Fusp%3Dsharing&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cdbd51f43da454bce3d7f08d5311ff459%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636468935674704849&sdata=6eboX5F53xZ0Lk2Q6l1hq%2BvIhYyuhoTzS8%2B1WE%2FJy%2FI%3D&reserved=0>


On Tue, Nov 21, 2017 at 12:41 PM, Repsher, Stephen J <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com<mailto:stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com>> wrote:
I’m fine with the language change, but until we resolve the conventional purposes and a finalized SC that links to or defines them somehow, I cannot give consensus one way or the other.  In other words, there’s no value in this change by itself until other parts of the document are changed.


From: Joshue O Connor [mailto:josh@interaccess.ie<mailto:josh@interaccess.ie>]
Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 12:57 PM
To: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
Subject: CFC - Update SC text Purpose of Controls

Call For Consensus — ends Friday November 24th at 1:00 PM Boston time.

The Working Group discussed an update to the Purpose of Controls SC on the call today [1].

The current SC text is:

"In content implemented using markup languages, the conventional name of conventional form fields, conventional buttons or controls, or conventional links can be programmatically determined."

This is to be changed to:

" In content implemented using markup languages, the purpose of user interface components that serve a conventional purpose can be programmatically determined."

If you have concerns about this proposed consensus position that have not been discussed already and feel that those concerns result in you “not being able to live with” this decision, please let the group know before the CfC deadline.

[1] https://www.w3.org/2017/11/21-ag-minutes.html<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2017%2F11%2F21-ag-minutes.html&data=02%7C01%7C%7Cdbd51f43da454bce3d7f08d5311ff459%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636468935674704849&sdata=qq1MGbM1cRpAQjF7pEsMNVjs4uB9y86ykAla%2B60YuBA%3D&reserved=0>
Joshue O Connor
Director | InterAccess.ie

John Foliot
Principal Accessibility Strategist
Deque Systems Inc.

Advancing the mission of digital accessibility and inclusion
Received on Tuesday, 21 November 2017 21:16:46 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 21:08:18 UTC