Re: WCAG 2.2 easy misc issues

+1

Kind regards,
Laura

On Wed, Dec 7, 2022, 5:08 PM Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
>
>
> There are a few items from the survey that I think we can finalise
> asynchronously as they were very close.
>
>
>
> *Change First Note 3.2.6 Consistent Help to align better with SC text
> #2408 *
>
> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/wcag22-misc-normative/results#xq2
>
>
>
> This was 14 in favour of merging the PR, 2 with adjustment (but no
> adjustment suggested), I’ll merge.
>
>
>
>
>
> *Note in Accessible Authentication needs to be reworded #2714*
>
> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/wcag22-misc-normative/results#xq3
>
>
>
> 15 in favour, 2 something else. Gundula and Oliver thought it changed the
> meaning, however, it now directly refers to the intended bullets in the SC.
> I’ll merge unless someone replies to object.
>
>
>
>
>
> *3.3.9 Redundant Entry out of order #2764 *
>
> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/wcag22-misc-normative/results#xq4
>
>
>
> 15 in favour, 2 something else. Gundula thought that readers might not
> understand the history and that we cannot change the numbering now.
> However, this is the last chance we have to re-order things without an
> errata.  I’ll merge.
>
>
>
>
>
> *Normative wording inconsistencies for Accessible Authentication SCs #2715
> *
>
> https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/wcag22-misc-normative/results#xq6
>
> 15 in favour, 1 agree with adjustment (but no adjustment suggested).
>
> I’ll merge.
>
>
>
> Any objections please reply soon. These SCs will come back via a (probably
> grouped) CFC as they are normative.
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
>
>
> -Alastair
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> @alastc / www.nomensa.com
>