RE: Plugins as SC - thread was: Visual Indicators

 > Respective disclaimer on top ?

There is a section at the very top of each technique called "Important Information about Techniques".

> "See Understanding Techniques for WCAG Success Criteria for important information about the usage of these informative techniques and how they relate to the normative WCAG 2.1 success criteria. The Applicability section explains the scope of the technique, and the presence of techniques for a specific technology does not imply that the technology can be used in all situations to create content that meets WCAG 2.1."

Any suggestions for improvement could be made as an issue on github:
https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues 

I think it's an include across all the techniques, so could take effect quickly.

Cheers,

-Alastair
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Schnabel, Stefan <stefan.schnabel@sap.com> 
Sent: 19 April 2020 10:10
To: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: RE: Plugins as SC - thread was: Visual Indicators

>>>, so how can we
make sure that when they land on them it's made crystal clear that what they're seeing isn't normative, and in the case of techniques, that this is nothing more than an example...

Respective disclaimer on top ? 😊 

But I feel nevertheless some will take it verbally. This is typically the point where discussions with devs start....

Regards
Stefan

-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
Sent: Sunday, April 19, 2020 11:05 AM
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: Re: Plugins as SC - thread was: Visual Indicators

On 19/04/2020 09:47, Schnabel, Stefan wrote:
[...]
>>> So let's not conflate failure examples with requirements.
> 
> This is EXACTLY what developers typically do. And these are your customers.
> Ambiguities weaken acceptance. Sorry, but this is how I see it.

Then we should be much clearer in how the understanding document, and individual failure/sufficient techniques, are labelled.

Yes, customers will jump in sideways/directly to those and get the misguided idea that they're more than just techniques, so how can we make sure that when they land on them it's made crystal clear that what they're seeing isn't normative, and in the case of techniques, that this is nothing more than an example...

P
--
Patrick H. Lauke

https://www.splintered.co.uk/ | https://github.com/patrickhlauke https://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | https://www.deviantart.com/redux

twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke

Received on Sunday, 19 April 2020 11:42:10 UTC