Re: Move WCAG 2.2 to Candidate Recommendation

Hi Wilco,

Yes, sorry, that’s why I setup the github issue asking for examples, as you suggested 😊

-Alastair


From: Wilco Fiers <wilco.fiers@deque.com>
Date: Thursday, 19 January 2023 at 11:14
To: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
Cc: WCAG list (w3c-wai-gl@w3.org) <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Move WCAG 2.2 to Candidate Recommendation
Hey Alastair,
I have asked if you wanted other suggestions, but I never got a response. Is the answer to that "yes"? Because if so I'll spend some time on that.

On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 4:10 PM Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com<mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com>> wrote:
Hi Wilco,

Sorry, I missed that email last week.

My understanding of the process is that we must make the decision about pulling an “at risk” SC before going into PR.

Having the research will help with that decision, but it isn’t a binary thing. We’ll have to look at what comes out and use that to inform the decision about whether to pull the SC before the PR transition.

I’ll also note that I’ve had 3 filled in responses, but no new examples suggested.

Kind regards,

-Alastair

Place to suggest examples: https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/2901<https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fw3c%2Fwcag%2Fissues%2F2901&data=05%7C01%7Cacampbell%40nomensa.com%7C5572e65899d14dc31e8308dafa0e5252%7Cebea4ad6fbbf43bd8449c56e26692c35%7C0%7C0%7C638097236666994726%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=G2tFi4%2F2olZPLHoEEVRGhQ3ywCcIUPVuT0V%2B6L3jdRk%3D&reserved=0>


From: Wilco Fiers <wilco.fiers@deque.com<mailto:wilco.fiers@deque.com>>
Date: Friday, 13 January 2023 at 13:42
To: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com<mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com>>
Cc: WCAG list (w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>) <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
Subject: Re: CFC - Move WCAG 2.2 to Candidate Recommendation
Thanks Alastair,
This is not how I understood the decision from December. To make sure I understand it; are you saying we're not LEAVING candidate rec until the research is finished? Is that guaranteed then?

Here's the thing about that. What happens if the research shows (as people have predicted) that the SC cannot be tested reliably? We can't introduce an SC that doesn't meet WCAG's requirements. We might not be able to drop the SC, going by how many people objected to that when it was last proposed. And to change the SC would require doing a third CR, which I'm not sure anyone wants either.

Before deciding if we should go to CR, I would really like to know what the AG chairs plan to do if Focus Appearance proves unreliable.

On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 1:13 PM Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com<mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com>> wrote:
Hi Wilco,

We have triaged all the comments and dealt with those that impact the normative wording. Those that are tagged with 'understanding', 'technique', 'editorial' or 'response-only' we will carry on dealing with as part of the backlog meetings.

The repeatability testing of focus-appearance was generated from one of the CR comments, and we will carry on with that during the (second) CR period.

Kind regards,

-Alastair



From: Wilco Fiers <wilco.fiers@deque.com<mailto:wilco.fiers@deque.com>>
Date: Friday, 13 January 2023 at 09:33
To: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com<mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com>>
Cc: WCAG list (w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>) <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
Subject: Re: CFC - Move WCAG 2.2 to Candidate Recommendation
Hey Alastair,
I would like a clarification. In the last call of December AGWG decided that it was going to perform a repeatability test of SC 2.4.11 Focus Appearance. You opened an issue on it last week: https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/2901<https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fw3c%2Fwcag%2Fissues%2F2901&data=05%7C01%7Cacampbell%40nomensa.com%7C5572e65899d14dc31e8308dafa0e5252%7Cebea4ad6fbbf43bd8449c56e26692c35%7C0%7C0%7C638097236666994726%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=G2tFi4%2F2olZPLHoEEVRGhQ3ywCcIUPVuT0V%2B6L3jdRk%3D&reserved=0>. It seems to me like we're not actually done processing our CR1 comments until we've done that work. Why are we putting a second CR out if we're not done processing comments on the first?

On Fri, Jan 13, 2023 at 2:14 AM Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com<mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com>> wrote:
Hi everyone,

Call for Consensus – ends Wednesday January 18th at 5pm Boston time.

The Working Group has approved CFCs for updated normative content in WCAG 2.2 and it is ready to re-start the Candidate Recommendation stage.

Recent changes came from these CFCs:
Removing 4.1.1: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2023JanMar/0010.html<https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.w3.org%2FArchives%2FPublic%2Fw3c-wai-gl%2F2023JanMar%2F0010.html&data=05%7C01%7Cacampbell%40nomensa.com%7C5572e65899d14dc31e8308dafa0e5252%7Cebea4ad6fbbf43bd8449c56e26692c35%7C0%7C0%7C638097236666994726%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=TZJLoJtYIk4imDCaPoiVna%2F3CFxTjwE1Evcf1WCGigQ%3D&reserved=0>
Target size: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2023JanMar/0047.html<https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.w3.org%2FArchives%2FPublic%2Fw3c-wai-gl%2F2023JanMar%2F0047.html&data=05%7C01%7Cacampbell%40nomensa.com%7C5572e65899d14dc31e8308dafa0e5252%7Cebea4ad6fbbf43bd8449c56e26692c35%7C0%7C0%7C638097236666994726%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=SaIY%2FPNPDQ9lWW%2Fqs%2BihMk5QYBwlybeQOa6LZ2Lii3A%3D&reserved=0>
And other miscellaneous changes:
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2022OctDec/0131.html<https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.w3.org%2FArchives%2FPublic%2Fw3c-wai-gl%2F2022OctDec%2F0131.html&data=05%7C01%7Cacampbell%40nomensa.com%7C5572e65899d14dc31e8308dafa0e5252%7Cebea4ad6fbbf43bd8449c56e26692c35%7C0%7C0%7C638097236666994726%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=0nzmNi93jMTzR9%2BngR8kUS4VDudkm5lZXfs4s3uYLFA%3D&reserved=0>
https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2023JanMar/0014.html<https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.w3.org%2FArchives%2FPublic%2Fw3c-wai-gl%2F2023JanMar%2F0014.html&data=05%7C01%7Cacampbell%40nomensa.com%7C5572e65899d14dc31e8308dafa0e5252%7Cebea4ad6fbbf43bd8449c56e26692c35%7C0%7C0%7C638097236666994726%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=phBcUQ8Kj57OQwCY2aqWTZn5w%2FXUxaEsgu5aqLZ48PU%3D&reserved=0>

You can see a diff of the current draft compared to the previous CR version here:
https://services.w3.org/htmldiff?doc1=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2FWCAG22%2F&doc2=https%3A%2F%2Fw3c.github.io%2Fwcag%2Fguidelines%2F22%2F<https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fservices.w3.org%2Fhtmldiff%3Fdoc1%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.w3.org%252FTR%252FWCAG22%252F%26doc2%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fw3c.github.io%252Fwcag%252Fguidelines%252F22%252F&data=05%7C01%7Cacampbell%40nomensa.com%7C5572e65899d14dc31e8308dafa0e5252%7Cebea4ad6fbbf43bd8449c56e26692c35%7C0%7C0%7C638097236666994726%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=n9z3inrP%2BiEfo6CTPcW0qlY2AHbGd2lYoeuL63iYJUc%3D&reserved=0>

Note that some changes are simply because the editors draft does not include CR content. Primarily that is in the introduction, but it is also missing the “at risk” markers. Those will still be included in the CR version.

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 tolerate” this decision, please let the group know before the CfC deadline.

Kind regards,

-Alastair

--

@alastc / www.nomensa.com<https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nomensa.com%2F&data=05%7C01%7Cacampbell%40nomensa.com%7C5572e65899d14dc31e8308dafa0e5252%7Cebea4ad6fbbf43bd8449c56e26692c35%7C0%7C0%7C638097236666994726%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=CjSOTEby1VZz63S3AifWdR0V0rEJtRsXnUYb0xd2Kt4%3D&reserved=0>





--
Wilco Fiers
Axe-core & Axe-linter product owner - WCAG 3 Project Manager - Facilitator ACT Task Force
Error! Filename not specified.



--
Wilco Fiers
Axe-core & Axe-linter product owner - WCAG 3 Project Manager - Facilitator ACT Task Force
Error! Filename not specified.



--
Wilco Fiers
Axe-core & Axe-linter product owner - WCAG 3 Project Manager - Facilitator ACT Task Force
[cid:BCBD7D4B-677E-4B95-AE3F-60005DBD9EE4]