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

Re: WCAG 2.2 status update

From: David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2020 15:49:56 -0500
Message-ID: <CAAdDpDbATXO26D4=TAo66jDni3X+ykCOrx3a5ff=fAoYwLeMCQ@mail.gmail.com>
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>
Hi Alastair

> *SCs that (probably) need more work than fits into the timescale: (visual

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

David MacDonald

*Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*

Tel:  613-806-9005



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

On Thu, Feb 6, 2020 at 10:52 AM Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>

> 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

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