Re: Error correction (Processes)

+1

Op di 14 jul. 2020 om 16:55 schreef Rachael Bradley Montgomery <
rachael@accessiblecommunity.org>:

> +1
>
> On Sun, Jul 12, 2020 at 5:20 PM Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Justine,
>>
>>
>>
>> For this bullet:
>>
>> “A mechanism is available for reviewing, confirming, and correcting
>> information before finalizing the submission, unless the information cannot
>> be modified for logical, security, or privacy reasons." [1]
>>
>>
>>
>> I think we had discussed using “essential” before, and from what I
>> remember “logical” wouldn’t fit under our current definition of essential.
>> That was intended for things like changing the destination of a holiday,
>> which would mean the hotel & flight would not (logically) be valid any
>> more. Not essential (by our functionality-focused definition), but not
>> valid either.
>>
>>
>>
>> For the next button aspect, it is based on the definition of ‘process’,
>> so the bullets need to be true before you finish the ‘activity’.
>>
>>
>>
>> However, it isn’t really about what buttons are used, it is about what
>> information is entered, and having a mechanism to review / confirm /
>> correct.
>>
>>
>>
>> That could be at any stage up to the final submission, it doesn’t require
>> that it is at the final step. For example, you might go back 3 steps to
>> review or edit something, then progress again.
>>
>>
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>>
>>
>> -Alastair
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 1] Preview of the SC & understanding:
>> https://raw.githack.com/w3c/wcag/wcag22-error-correction/understanding/22/error-correction-processes.html
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Pascalides, Justine
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>>
>>
>> An exception to the SC is implied with the current verbiage. It seems to
>> me that explicitly calling out the exception (i.e., “unless essential to
>> the activity”) would align with the presentation of exceptions in other
>> success criteria – which would cover the logical, security, privacy, and
>> other valid reasons where an exception might be applicable.
>>
>>
>>
>> Does the use of a “Next” button within a process constitute a submission?
>> If buttons used to advance but not complete a process are out of scope,
>> perhaps explicitly mentioning that would be helpful in defining a
>> “submission” for purposes of this SC.
>>
>>
>>
>> Justine
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
>> *Sent:* Friday, July 10, 2020 5:51 AM
>> *To:* WCAG list (w3c-wai-gl@w3.org) <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
>> *Subject:* RE: CFC - Add "Error correction (Processes)" to WCAG 2.2 draft
>> *Importance:* High
>>
>>
>>
>> Apologies, that was the wrong PR link, it should be:
>>
>> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/1157
>> <https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fw3c%2Fwcag%2Fpull%2F1157&data=02%7C01%7Cjpascalides%40ets.org%7Ccd582c94933c405cf7be08d824b6bba0%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C637299714540028847&sdata=jtqO%2BOk6QzJyu6uPmCPcKTNZNaWu27JEXPDbUaYDTUQ%3D&reserved=0>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Alastair Campbell
>>
>>
>>
>> Call For Consensus — ends Wednesday July 15th at midday Boston time.
>>
>>
>>
>> The Working Group has discussed adding the new SC “Error correction
>> (Processes)” to the WCAG 2.2 draft:
>>
>> https://www.w3.org/2020/03/25-ag-minutes.html#item03
>> <https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2020%2F03%2F25-ag-minutes.html%23item03&data=02%7C01%7Cjpascalides%40ets.org%7Ccd582c94933c405cf7be08d824b6bba0%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C637299714540028847&sdata=d3y5bvaHRbrp65DPhFPypUheLUDzgWDOYBO2kjc%2B7%2Fo%3D&reserved=0>
>>
>>
>>
>> The changes, preview of the documents, and survey link are detailed in
>> this pull request:
>>
>> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/1046
>> <https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fw3c%2Fwcag%2Fpull%2F1046&data=02%7C01%7Cjpascalides%40ets.org%7Ccd582c94933c405cf7be08d824b6bba0%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C637299714540038841&sdata=jce6Q7NL4o2gWUxzLv0AClEY2CXRLAl%2BxpggyByttRM%3D&reserved=0>
>>
>>
>>
>> If you have concerns about this proposed consensus position that have not
>> been discussed already and feel that those concerns result in you “not
>> being able to live with” this decision, please let the group know before
>> the CfC deadline.
>>
>>
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>>
>>
>> -Alastair
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>> www.nomensa.com
>> <https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nomensa.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cjpascalides%40ets.org%7Ccd582c94933c405cf7be08d824b6bba0%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C637299714540048833&sdata=h5n8AdbjK20hVzqbMWoIzchT%2B%2B7k10qrhdbtoEcXVCU%3D&reserved=0>
>> / @alastc
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or
>> confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for whom
>> it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this e-mail
>> in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute, or
>> take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and delete
>> it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thank you for your compliance.
>> ------------------------------
>>
>
>
> --
> Rachael Montgomery, PhD
> Director, Accessible Community
> rachael@accessiblecommunity.org
>
> "I will paint this day with laughter;
> I will frame this night in song."
>  - Og Mandino
>
>

Received on Tuesday, 14 July 2020 14:56:47 UTC