Re: Redundant entry queries

Hey Alastair,

The way the word "step" is used here it seems to mean a different screens
in a multi-screen process. For example in buying items from an eShop one
might have step 1 be filling out billing address, step 2 selecting payment
method, and step 3 the actual payment. But another way to understand "step"
is to have it be a synonym of "user action", which is how "process" is
defined. In such a case, each form field a user can put information into is
a step. Filling out your name is step 1, filling out your billing address
step 2, 3 and 4, clicking the "next" button is step 5, selecting payment
method is step 6, etc.

Understanding "step" as a synonym for "user action" actually makes more
sense because of that "process (i.e., a sequence of steps...)" thing in
conformance requirement 3. There are at least two different, equally
plausible ways to explain what this word "step" means from the normative
text. In my opinion that needs to be fixed.


W

On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 1:10 PM Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
wrote:

> Hi Wilco,
>
>
>
> > This success criterion has not been recently surveyed.
>
>
>
> Indeed, but we didn’t want to run the CFC just before or during CSUN.
>
> We had reviewed it in Jan & Feb, and resolved in the latter meeting to
> publish once the technique was finished (which took us to early March).
>
>
>
>
>
> > - "step" has not been defined. I've remarked on this several times
> before.
>
>
>
> Based on your comments we discussed that on Jan 28th:
>
> https://www.w3.org/2020/01/28-ag-minutes.html#item02
>
>
>
> The main thoughts were that we try not to define things which are already
> dictionary defined, e.g.:
>
> https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/step#cald4-2
>
>
>
> And we already talk about “a sequence of steps” for processes in the
> conformance section as well:
>
> https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#cc3
>
>
>
> As far as I can tell everyone else is happy with it being a standard usage
> of the term, is there a scenario you have in mind where it is not clear?
>
>
>
>
>
> > The exception has a dual meaning. The word "essential" can be read to be
> either about re-entering being essential, or the information being
> essential.
>
>
>
> I can’t see how you’d get the latter interpretation from:
> “When re-entering the information is essential”.
>
>
>
> I think you’d have to ignore ‘re-entering’, or put a comma after it to get
> the other interpretation. From the other comments, are you sure you were
> looking at the version in the pull request? E.g. there is a word between
> information & essential.
>
>
>
>
>
> >  "available for the user to select" is vague. "select" can mean a number
> of things, including highlighting with a cursor for copy/paste.
>
>
>
> That was the intent, i.e. it could be a variety of things including
> copy-paste. The point was you don’t have to recall it from memory. There is
> a proposal for a technique for “Displaying the previously entered value and
> allowing the user to select it”.
>
>
>
> We could add something to the understanding document about that, but from
> your comment it seems to convey what was intended.
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
>
>
> -Alastair
>


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