Placement of 1.3.4

Hi Katie,

I was really hoping you’d be there so we could discuss it and get to a conclusion, but health comes first. I’ll try and outline the primary factors we discussed:

Primarily – this is an approved SC, we’re in CR, and the discussion is about placement, which is an editorial aspect. Therefore we shouldn’t take our focus off the bigger picture of implementations, evaluations & understanding docs.

Also, I was on the COGA call today and put this question to Lisa et al. I think my exact question was: Would you rather this SC was in the current place or under input assistance? Their response was to leave it where it is.
As you know I was sceptical, but they do consider It as the first step towards personalisation and would like it’s position (and understanding document) to reflect that.

John made the point that the use of autocomplete (and focus on that benefit) has skewed the discussion, the HTML5 autocomplete is the technique, the aim is still personalisation.
It also looks like we’ll have one or two user-agents to show the personalisation aspects before the end of the month.

From the github issue [1] I was trying to read into your comments which are concerns about the SC overall, and which are about placement.

Given the above comments, has that addressed your concern about the placement?
And if not, are you likely to be able to make Tuesday?

Kind regards,

-Alastair

1] https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/768


From: Katie Haritos-Shea

I could not make this call as I was at the doctors. Had I been there, I would have strongly opposed tbe response on 1.3.4 and the idea to keep it where it is and not move it to 3.3