W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2018

Re: a suggestion for Personalization Semantics

From: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jan 2018 14:52:38 +0000
To: John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com>
CC: "W3c-Wai-Gl-Request@W3. Org" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <2BAD5C63-4882-4C0A-B69B-80819A0399B9@nomensa.com>
JF wrote:
> we cannot retroactively say that they are *REQUIRED*, nor can we fail content that does not use either form of landmark determination.

I agreed that In WCAG 2.0 we couldn’t add it, but why can’t we simple add a failure for that in 2.1?

It would be similar in concept to F91:

(I.e. lacking markup that the content implies visually, the point of 1.3.1.)

Why would we need a new (very-overlapping) SC for that?

Create the new failure doc, link to up from 1.3.1 material… job done?


Received on Friday, 12 January 2018 14:53:04 UTC

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