Re: CFC - WCAG 2.2 Redundant entry

My one concern is:

The term "available to select" is not prescriptive. The term allows authors to develop techniques where auto-population is not possible. It can include allowing the user to:

  *   select text from the page and copy it into an input;

Iím concerned that this can be interpreted as letting the user scroll down, away from the task at hand, to copy information, then find their way back to where they need to input it. Or maybe they even have to navigate backwards across multiple screens. Either way it exacerbates the issue.

If the text to copy is within view of the input, that would be ok though.

Other than this example Iím good with the rest of it.

David Fazio, President | [signature_1633184954] <>
[A picture containing sitting  Description automatically generated] |[signature_1943303136]<>
P. +1 510.590.7363| e.<>| W.<>
 [Cooperative Understanding Facilitator of Human Inclusion Badge] <>         [Society for Human Resource Management Approved Provider Badge]                 [Logo  HR Certification Institute 2022 Approved Provider Seal]

From: jake abma <>
Date: Tuesday, June 7, 2022 at 7:22 AM
To: Alastair Campbell <>
Cc: WCAG list ( <>
Subject: Re: CFC - WCAG 2.2 Redundant entry

Op ma 6 jun. 2022 om 17:21 schreef Alastair Campbell <<>>:
Call For Consensus ó ends Friday June 10th at midday Boston time.

The Working Group has previously discussed the WCAG 2.2 SC Redundant Entry and it needs to be approved by CFC.

It can be previewed in the editorís draft:

The SC was last discussed Dec 3rd:

The change history is here:

The surveys are available here: and

The github issues (all closed) are listed here:

If you have concerns about this proposed consensus position that have not been discussed already and feel that those concerns result in you ďnot being able to live withĒ this decision, please let the group know before the CfC deadline.

Kind regards,

@alastc /<>

Received on Tuesday, 7 June 2022 14:38:20 UTC