Re: Add "Error correction (Processes)" to WCAG 2.2 draft

Thank Alastair, putting them together in a single doc was helpful and 
I'm in general agreement that this helps. Perhaps John K will also have 
some thoughts?

Will there be a link to a definition of 'process'? ie multi step. I 
assume "Web Page" is the reductive form of a process though?

It takes a bit of work to figure out the relationship between these. Im 
not sure how such closely related SCs at different levels interect. For 
example, 3.3.6 simply disposes of the 'get out' clause of 3.3.2. But 
what of 3.3.x?

In the language of the existing SCs, 3.3.x at AA basically says 
submission must must be "Confirmed" unless the information cannot be 
modified for logical, security, or privacy reasons.

However if AA requires all A to also be met then 3.3.2 says you can 
optionally choose "Confirmed" *but with no get out*. Is that a problem? 
I think it's clear must trumps optional and possibly clear that the 
extra clause applies as a relaxation. But does it need spelling out?

If AA doesn't not include A then we might want to add "Reversable" and 
"Checked" to 3.3.x such they are still included.

thanks

Steve


On 29/07/2020 16:13, Alastair Campbell wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
> 
> The CFC did not pass, apologies for the delay in finalising this one.
> 
> I think it is worth one final shot if a small adjustment helps.
> 
> Of the issues raised:
> 
>   * Gundula raised an issue, but off-list confirmed she could live with it.
> 
>   * Justine raised an issue which I think can be tackled in the
>     understanding document.
>     NB: Adding ‘essential’ to the end of the 1^st bullet doesn’t work
>     with the definition.
> 
>   * Jon & Sailesh raised issues around how it fits with 3.3.4 & 3.3.6
> 
> On the last point, what if we adjusted the levels so that we had:
> 
> 3.3.4 Error Prevention (Legal, Financial, Data) – Level A, moving from AA.
> 
> 3.3.X Error Correction (Processes) – Level AA
> 
> 3.3.6 Error Prevention (All) – Level AAA
> 
> This doc shows the three SCs together: 
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PItvc45Neukviw3KZOS0dpOi3L4Xj5ZBMYxLT3vaLSY/edit# 
> 
> 
> The gap COGA were most interesting in filling was to enable correction 
> before you finalise a process. That is not covered (properly) by 3.3.4. 
> In WCAG 2.1 the aim was to update 3.3.4, but that didn’t work out.
> 
> Would that adjustment to the levels make sense?
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> -Alastair
> 
> *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
> 
> The changes, preview of the documents, and survey link are detailed in 
> this pull request:
> 
> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/1157
> 
> 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 <http://www.nomensa.com/> / @alastc
>

Received on Thursday, 6 August 2020 15:45:09 UTC