Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2019 11:21:15 +0200
Message-ID: <CAHVyjGOM5VSObJj3nnxRvV7kgm_=dQC4k1ZJ=bviSgjkyrv4rA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
Cc: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Hey Alastair, +1 on doing this as a WCAG 2.1 errata. I also propose adding an "Errata" heading to the understanding document, and possibly an errata appendix to 2.1, so that this is transparent. W On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 10:48 AM Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com> wrote: > Hi Wilco, > > > > Back in this thread, if it were proposed as an errata to 2.1 (thus > updating 2.2 as well), would that be a +1 or neutral for you? > > > > I.e. on the substance of the change/ clarification. > > > > -Alastair > > > > *From: *Wilco Fiers > > > > -1 to this and any other change changing existing success criteria. > -- *Wilco Fiers* Axe for Web product owner - Co-facilitator WCAG-ACT - Chair ACT-R
(image/gif attachment: deque_logo_180p.gif)