- From: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
- Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2022 09:09:44 +0000
- To: "WCAG list (w3c-wai-gl@w3.org)" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <PR3PR09MB534702F6034EF49F5C73A17AB9719@PR3PR09MB5347.eurprd09.prod.outlook.com>
Hi everyone, I don’t think we’ve had any concerns about these updates, but I’ll state them concisely here. Firstly, some fairly editorial updates: 2. Clarify Accessible Authentication by including "remembering user names and passwords" in the SC text #2577 Most people agree with the addition, with a couple of suggestions to put it in parenthesise and include at the AAA level. PR 2609<https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/2609/files> has been updated to reflect that. There was a concern about the term “cognitive function test”, but for want of a better alternative, they could live with it. Does anyone object to PR 2609<https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/2609/files> which adds: (such as remembering a password or solving a puzzle) to both versions? 3. Editorial update to accessible-auth exception #2608 Tobias made a suggestion which several people agreed with (and doesn’t change the meaning), so I’ve updated PR 2608<https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/2608/files> to reflect that. Any objections to that update? New issue 2 I don’t think there’s a separate issue for it, but in a couple of places people have raised that: identifying content the user has provided to the website could include passwords. To resolve this, I’m proposing we use “non-text content” in the exception, and remove ‘text’ from the note. This is implemented in PR 2624<https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/2624/files>. Any objections? Then a more substantial re-structure: New issue 1 In the thread of Issue 2592<https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/2592> EricE proposed to re-structure the SC text so it uses bullet-points for the exceptions AND the alternative & mechanism aspects. To keep it aligned with the current meaning I suggested it use a structure more like the alt-text SC: https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/2592#issuecomment-1217758169 The question at this point is: Do people think that improves the SC and no-one would object? If anyone objects, we’ll shut-down that approach now rather than take time on it but I couldn’t see a problem with it. Kind regards, -Alastair -- @alastc / www.nomensa.com<http://www.nomensa.com>
Received on Monday, 22 August 2022 09:10:34 UTC