Re: CFC - 4.1.1 Parsing in WCAG 2.0 and 2.1

AG Working Group members,



As we have received substantial negative feedback during this CfC, we would like to explore an alternative approach.


I will follow up with a summary and alternative.

Kind regards,

-Alastair


From: Alastair Campbell
Call For Consensus — ends Friday Wed 15th at midday Boston time.

The group has discussed what to do with 4.1.1 Parsing in WCAG 2.0 & 2.1 now that it has been removed from WCAG 2.2.

From the discussion:
https://www.w3.org/2023/03/07-ag-minutes#item10

Following the same approach as WCAG 2.2 was the preferred approach, where the SC text would be removed and replaced with a note that says why it has been removed.

The specific changes are detailed in these two pull requests:
https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3093
https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3094

Survey results: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/wcag22-misc5/results#xq23

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.

Assuming the group agrees to this change, there is likely to be a public review before we can re-publish WCAG 2.0 & 2.1.
https://www.w3.org/2021/Process-20211102/#last-call-review

Kind regards,

-Alastair

--

@alastc / www.nomensa.com<http://www.nomensa.com>