- From: David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
- Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2020 15:49:56 -0500
- To: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
- Cc: WCAG list <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, COGA TF <public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org>, "public-mobile-a11y-tf@w3.org" <public-mobile-a11y-tf@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAAdDpDbATXO26D4=TAo66jDni3X+ykCOrx3a5ff=fAoYwLeMCQ@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Alastair > *SCs that (probably) need more work than fits into the timescale: (visual Indicators)* There appears to be a lot of activity around rewrites of the SC. Also. There is a fallback passive SC that I think would be an easy pass if the full version can't get through https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WhZAbswvPHs7A3stfqM_ATsaBHPeGbHtARcmaKMck1U/edit# Cheers, David MacDonald *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.* Tel: 613-806-9005 LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100> twitter.com/davidmacd GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald> www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/> * Adapting the web to all users* * Including those with disabilities* If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy <http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html> On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 10:52 AM Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com> wrote: > Hi everyone, > > > > A quick general update on the status of the various WCAG 2.2 SCs, I’ve > tried to order on how much work appears to be left to do. > > > > For anyone shepherding an SC, please do look at the agendas > <https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Upcoming_agendas> page and let me know if > you won’t be around when your one(s) are up. Also, if I have missed some > conversation / updates and it has moved on more than I know, please reply > to me. > > > > *SCs for review / approval:* > > > > - *Hidden controls:* Updated after the review on 21st Jan: > https://www.w3.org/2020/01/21-ag-minutes.html#item02 > Need to assess if the changes work for everyone: > https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/essential-controls/ > - *Touch target spacing: *Updated by Kathy & Mobile task force to > enforce a minimum size+spacing. Reviewed on 21st Jan: > https://www.w3.org/2020/01/21-ag-minutes.html#item03 > There were no objections to the SC text and approach, so need a firmer > understanding doc & technique. > - *Information in steps:* Agreed to proceed with the SC text on the > 28th: > https://www.w3.org/2020/01/28-ag-minutes.html#item02 > Need a technique, then we can create PR to integrate. > - *Fixed Reference Points: *Reviewed Jan 28th: > https://www.w3.org/2020/01/28-ag-minutes.html#item04 > It seemed that making it more specific to page numbers from a paper > publication would be more appropriate, if that is updated quickly it > could be re-reviewed. > - *Dragging:* Was reviewed Jan 7th, and since then some examples have > been found & put forward, so it does appear to be feasible. There are still > comments from the review that need updating in the doc. > https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/wcag22-dragging/ > - *Find help*: Reviewed Feb 4th: > https://www.w3.org/2020/02/04-ag-minutes.html#item08 > Difficult because we cannot target by size or type of site, so > “actively supported” is a tricky concept. Need someone to help or come > up with a way around that. > - *Confirmation before submission:* Reviewed Dec 10th: > https://www.w3.org/2019/12/10-ag-minutes.html#item03 > I think it needs some updates before another review (SteveL). Previous > results: > > https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/wcag22-confirm-before-submission/results > > > > *SCs that (probably) need more work than fits into the timescale:* > > - *Visual indicators*: Last reviewed Jan 7th: > https://www.w3.org/2020/01/07-ag-minutes.html#item05 > In the reviewed form, it requires a lot of (documented) practical > research into how different components would pass/fail. > There has been a side conversation, but it still needs quite a lot of > research/work. > https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Visual_indicators/ > - *Custom interactions*, reviewed Dec 17th: > https://www.w3.org/2019/12/17-ag-minutes.html#item04 > Some big questions left open about whether the interaction is the > problem, or the expectation of the interaction. > Would really like people to collect examples of a non-standard > interactions (anyone, not just Jake!). This doesn’t appear to have > happened yet. > > > > *SCs that hit problems, not scheduling for re-review:* > > - *Icon Description*: Was reviewed on the 7th Jan: > https://www.w3.org/2020/01/07-ag-minutes.html#item06 > There does not seem to be a good way of achieving this on touch-screen > devices, in a way that doesn’t make the interaction worse in some > circumstances. > - *Visible labels* & *Orientation:* were thought to be possible to > cover with understanding/technique updates. > > > > *SCs approved:* > > - *Accessible authentication:* Approved on a call, need a review of > the PR and CFC: > https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/1037 > - *Focus visible (enhanced):* CFC approved, will be included in the > working draft soon. Post-approval comments in github. > > Kind regards, > > > > -Alastair > > -- > > www.nomensa.com / @alastc >
Received on Thursday, 6 February 2020 20:50:13 UTC