Target Size (min) SC

Hi Jon,

Yes, the definition link will work when it's published properly, it can be previewed here as well:
https://raw.githack.com/w3c/wcag/main/understanding/22/target-size-minimum.html

Thanks for the typo in the understanding doc, got that.

-Alastair


From: Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@levelaccess.com>
Sent: 06 April 2021 23:02
To: WCAG list (w3c-wai-gl@w3.org) <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: RE: CFC - Target Size (min) SC

+1

In addition, The linked definition for target offset is missing though but it is described in the body text.

The word "form" here should be "from" - "would be measured form this bottom edge"

Jonathan

From: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com<mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com>>
Sent: Tuesday, April 6, 2021 4:46 PM
To: WCAG list (w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>) <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
Subject: CFC - Target Size (min) SC
Importance: High

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.


Call For Consensus - ends 9th April at noon Boston time.



The Working Group has discussed the WCAG 2.2 success criteria "Target Size (Minimum)", the latest version can be seen here:

https://w3c.github.io/wcag/understanding/target-size-minimum.html



Survey of issues and responses:

https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/wcag22-target-spacing-issues/results



Previous minutes include:

https://www.w3.org/2021/04/06-ag-minutes.html#t02

https://www.w3.org/2021/03/30-ag-minutes.html#item04

https://www.w3.org/2021/03/02-ag-minutes.html#item03



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

--

@alastc / www.nomensa.com<http://www.nomensa.com>