W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2020

Re: Focus visisble (enhanced) history

From: Wilco Fiers <wilco.fiers@deque.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2020 22:32:18 +0100
Message-ID: <CAHVyjGPDEvL_QstSMdij8pxvJ=98Kp1+cqbHaYyE+c-vbP+3cQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
Cc: WCAG list <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Hey Alastair,
Thank you for the clarification.

- Regarding 1.4.7; In all fairness, that CfC you're referring to doesn't
mention changing the conformance level of 1.4.7. I get that the chairs
might have thought that this change was implied by "Add Focus Visible
(Enhanced)", but to me that was not obvious. I will open an issue on Github
as you suggested. I have heard from other people at Deque with questions
about this, so this does not change my vote for the FPWD.

- Regarding "success criterion" in the heading; If it wasn't intentional,
let's change it back. I do kind of like the change, but we would need a
definition of "success criterion" if we were to make such a change. I think
it may be best to put it back for the FPWD and revisit this later.

- Regarding the errata. I noticed the difference by diffing 2.1 with the
draft. How come WCAG 2.1 hasn't been updated if there is an errata? I
opened a similar issue for 2.0 a few months back too (
https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/920). It'd be good to have a timeline
for this. But this shouldn't hold up FPWD.


On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 7:21 PM Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>

> Hi Wilco,
> > I noticed 2.4.7 was changed from Level AA to Level A. I apologies if I
> missed the conversation on this
> That was from last summer, it isn’t a recent thing. It started from quite
> an active thread which you were involved in:
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2019JulSep/0002.html
> We then had various options outlined in this survey:
> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/updating-wcag2-requirements/results
> And then agreed on a call:
> https://www.w3.org/2019/07/16-ag-minutes.html#item02
> And then agreed to publish with that change:
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2020JanMar/0000.html
> The SC text for the WCAG 2.0 SC is not changing, it is just moving up a
> level.
> If you would like to re-open that issue I think a github issue would be a
> suitable place to register that.
> > The "success criterion" (and "guideline") text was removed from the
> headings.
> That’s odd, I hadn’t noticed. I don’t think that is intentional, I’ll
> check with Michael.
> > In 1.4.13 the word "Dismissable" was changed to "Dismissible". Similar
> to my first comment, a change like that should in my opinion be done in an
> errata, not in a new working draft.
> It is an errata from 2.1:
> https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG21/errata/#editorial
> That is why it is showing up in 2.2. (So the real question is why doesn’t
> that show up in 2.1, to which I’d have to dig into a W3C policy thing.)
> Does that mitigate your concerns?
> Kind regards,
> -Alastair

*Wilco Fiers*
Axe for Web product owner - Co-facilitator WCAG-ACT - Chair ACT-R

(image/gif attachment: deque_logo_180p.gif)

Received on Tuesday, 4 February 2020 21:32:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 21:08:34 UTC