RE: CFC - response to Issue 605

+1. 

 

I didn’t want to see ‘markup’ removed. I was just hoping we could add some text to cover other technologies so it would be more technology agnostic. I understand and appreciate the discussion that was had in the meeting. Happy!

 

From: Andrew Kirkpatrick [mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 9, 2018 1:56 PM
To: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: CFC - response to Issue 605
Importance: High

 

Call For Consensus — ends Thursday January 9th at 1:45pm Boston time.

 

The Working Group has discussed a response to issue 605 (https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/605).

 

The specific response is at https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Draft_Responses_to_Dec_WD_Issues#605, and it was surveyed at https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/resolvingissues3/results#xq4.

 

Call minutes: https://www.w3.org/2018/01/09-ag-minutes.html#item04

 

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.

 

Thanks,

AWK

 

Andrew Kirkpatrick

Group Product Manager, Accessibility

Adobe 

 

akirkpat@adobe.com <mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com> 

http://twitter.com/awkawk <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fawkawk&data=02%7C01%7C%7C54093524ef264326424008d51cd66c05%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636446629619786436&sdata=c5UP0xiniJIppvd6Esu1XA%2FbX1ykpABkhgCCmBp%2Fht8%3D&reserved=0>