Re: CFC - Response to issue 598: Exit criteria technology-specific?

AGWG’ers,

As we have received only positive feedback leading up to this CfC and no responses indicating that group members could not live this this decision, this CfC is agreed on as a consensus opinion of the working group.

This decision will be recorded at https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Decisions<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FWAI%2FGL%2Fwiki%2FDecisions&data=02%7C01%7C%7C1ab6006ec2be48e88f9008d4a210961e%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636311639507586899&sdata=IafGoKjeQf7zBqxVj8m380hh8%2BWgU1VfPa2tZjq0Bx8%3D&reserved=0>

Thanks,
AWK

Andrew Kirkpatrick
Group Product Manager, Accessibility
Adobe

akirkpat@adobe.com<mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com>
http://twitter.com/awkawk



From: Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>
Date: Monday, January 15, 2018 at 01:35
To: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: CFC - Response to issue 598: Exit criteria technology-specific?
Resent-From: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Resent-Date: Monday, January 15, 2018 at 01:35

Call For Consensus — ends Tuesday January 17th at 1:30am Boston time.

The Working Group has discussed responses to the following issue:
598: (https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/598)

Response to Issue 598: https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Draft_Responses_to_Dec_WD_Issues#598<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FWAI%2FGL%2Fwiki%2FDraft_Responses_to_Dec_WD_Issues%23598&data=02%7C01%7Cakirkpat%40adobe.com%7C05b367549be0424471d308d55be23901%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636515949533743972&sdata=8arkdZI6m%2F48hY6gWd8BBGIY0TP34%2BvS3C9jF%2FUUPrY%3D&reserved=0>

The response is: “Thank you for the comment. We intend to include PDF documents in the implementations for review. PDF documents can satisfy the WCAG definition for "web page", which is: "a non-embedded resource obtained from a single URI using HTTP plus any other resources that are used in the rendering or intended to be rendered together with it by a user agent". This is the same reasoning used to include techniques for PDF for WCAG 2.0 in the past, and we will be looking to offer PDF techniques for WCAG 2.1 Success Criteria as well.”

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>