Re: CFC - Move WCAG 2.2 to Candidate Recommendation (Take 2)

+1
Cheers,
David MacDonald



*Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*
Mobile:  613.806.9005

LinkedIn
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>

twitter.com/davidmacd

GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald>

www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/>



*  Adapting the web to all users*
*            Including those with disabilities*

If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy
<http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html>


On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 1:20 PM Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
>
>
> Call for Consensus – ends Tuesday August 30th at 2pm Boston time (a
> shorter time as this is take 2).
>
>
>
> The Working Group has approved CFCs for all new normative content in WCAG
> 2.2 and it is ready to move to Candidate Recommendation.
>
>
>
> The draft is at
> https://w3c.github.io/wcag/guidelines/22/#new-features-in-wcag-2-2
>
>
>
> 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.
>
>
>
> An outline of changes since the last CFC is below.
>
>
>
>
>
>    - Several (proposed) WCAG 2.1/2.0 errata have been tackled. We also
>    agreed to re-publish WCAG 2.1 so the errata will show up in the main spec,
>    and we can tackle more of them before re-publication.
>
>    - The Flash provisions have been updated.
>
>    - The exception for Accessibility Authentication has been changed as
>    part of the re-structuring (no change to meaning/requirement).
>
>    https://w3c.github.io/wcag/guidelines/22/#accessible-authentication-no-exception
>
>
>    - Focus appearance:
>       - The first line was updated to address the ‘persistence’ objection.
>       - The sub-components aspect was updated.
>       - The SC will be marked at risk due to complexity.
>       - We have added a note on interpreting the visual aspect for
>       sizing, we’re just narrowing down the wording/terms on that currently.
>       - The user-agent survey was very balanced, so checking previous
>       results on the same topic the chairs interpret the consensus view is to use
>       the current exceptions, status quo.
>
>       - Focus obscured: No change to the SC, but we are planning to add a
>    cross-reference in the understanding document to focus-appearance for
>    semi-opaque scenarios.
>
>
>