Re: CFC - Errata for WCAG 2.1 accessibility supported definition

+1

Thanks,
AWK

Andrew Kirkpatrick
Director, Accessibility
Adobe

akirkpat@adobe.com<mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com>
http://twitter.com/awkawk



From: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
Date: Thursday, January 6, 2022 at 12:34 PM
To: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: CFC - Errata for WCAG 2.1 accessibility supported definition
Resent-From: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Resent-Date: Thursday, January 6, 2022 at 12:32 PM


Call For Consensus — ends Monday January 10th at mid-day Boston time.



The Working Group has discussed a small change to a note on a definition:

https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#h-note-43<https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2FWCAG21%2F%23h-note-43&data=04%7C01%7Cakirkpat%40adobe.com%7Cc9556cbc971d486ff69608d9d13a8fbb%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637770872763860768%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=4MaJHVcAycklYoX72s8D%2B2M0UB8ohmPTus1i9sfdWKA%3D&reserved=0>



Whilst it is a small change, it is normative therefore we are going through the CFC process.



It was raised in this issue:

https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/1758<https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fw3c%2Fwcag%2Fissues%2F1758&data=04%7C01%7Cakirkpat%40adobe.com%7Cc9556cbc971d486ff69608d9d13a8fbb%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637770872763860768%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=WyY3q%2FJK2PDJw39MqmtbNFpp4NLww9KVT%2F62y7G5AeI%3D&reserved=0>



Discussed and agreed in this meeting:

https://www.w3.org/2022/01/04-ag-minutes.html#t06<https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2022%2F01%2F04-ag-minutes.html%23t06&data=04%7C01%7Cakirkpat%40adobe.com%7Cc9556cbc971d486ff69608d9d13a8fbb%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637770872763860768%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=gIWfFgb3W0sXHZ9bRldj4eWvrEdfk2c9NiDpeGtplh8%3D&reserved=0>



The specific changes are detailed in this pull request:
https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/1777/files<https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fw3c%2Fwcag%2Fpull%2F1777%2Ffiles&data=04%7C01%7Cakirkpat%40adobe.com%7Cc9556cbc971d486ff69608d9d13a8fbb%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637770872764016996%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=YIZkwH0xOruM0Dy5O8mu3Pfww2gwUCr8zMIWko3KUBE%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

--

@alastc / www.nomensa.com<https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nomensa.com%2F&data=04%7C01%7Cakirkpat%40adobe.com%7Cc9556cbc971d486ff69608d9d13a8fbb%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637770872764016996%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000&sdata=8vms13fHYcZ1CtqRtYx5119xxO0xFTUIwVCIkyFZSI0%3D&reserved=0>