Re: CFC - 4.1.1 Parsing in WCAG 2.0 and 2.1

Dan Bjorge writes:

>  The normative conformance model doesn’t make any affordance for authors
being allowed to ignore criteria just because they are redundant, and we
shouldn’t be adding non-normative notes that sound like they’re overriding
the normative conformance model.


+1 to Dan

This is what I have been saying as well: the real area of concern is
the *conformance
model*, and non-normative notes cannot override normative requirements.

>  "Although the HTML Standard treats some of these cases as non-conforming
for authors, it is considered to "allow these features" for the purposes of
this Success Criterion because the specification..."


-1
I struggle with referring to non-conformant code as a "feature" - it's not
a feature, it's an error, and I believe changing those terms does not
materially change the intent:


*"Although the HTML Standard treats some of these cases as non-conforming
for authors, it is considered to "allow these errors" for the purposes of
this Success Criterion because the specification..."*


At the end of the day, we may now tolerate these types of errors due to
browser remediation, but let's be honest and clear that it is still a
coding error that the author is getting away with.

I continue to assert as well that an additional note to the conformance
model recognizing the new WG position on errors and this SC should be
included with Section 5.2.

JF

On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 9:04 PM Dan Bjorge <Dan.Bjorge@microsoft.com> wrote:

> -1
>
>
>
> I support the idea of adding a note, but not the specific proposed text,
> particularly the sentence “This criterion can therefore be ignored as being
> redundant.” The normative conformance model doesn’t make any affordance for
> authors being allowed to ignore criteria just because they are redundant,
> and we shouldn’t be adding non-normative notes that sound like they’re
> overriding the normative conformance model.
>
>
>
> Instead of the note saying “you can ignore the criteria because it’s
> redundant”, I would be much more comfortable having it say “you can ignore
> the criteria because we consider the exception *already written into the
> normative text of the SC* to apply to all HTML content.” I think this is
> an important distinction, particularly for the purposes of minimizing
> drive-by non-conformance claims.
>
>
>
> I’ve included a more complete suggestion along these lines as a comment
> in PR #3116 <https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3116#discussion_r1147007984>
> .
>
>
>
> -Dan
>
>
>
> *From:* Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 23, 2023 8:35 AM
> *To:* WCAG list (w3c-wai-gl@w3.org) <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> *Subject:* CFC - 4.1.1 Parsing in WCAG 2.0 and 2.1
> *Importance:* High
>
>
>
> Hi everyone,
>
>
>
> Call For Consensus — ends Tuesday 28th March at 1PM Boston time.
>
>
>
> Following from a previous CFC which did not pass:
>
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2023JanMar/0201.html
>
>
>
> We discussed an alternative:
>
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2023JanMar/0282.html
>
>
>
> That alternative appears to have support (including from those objecting
> to the previous CFC).
>
>
>
> The change has been implemented here:
>
> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3116
>
>
>
> It adds the proposed note to the SC text, and updates the understanding
> document. The understanding document states that it has been removed from
> 2.2 but remains in WCAG 2.0 and 2.1 with a note (and replicates the note
> there).
>
>
>
> 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.
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
>
>
> -Alastair
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> @alastc / www.nomensa.com
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
*John Foliot* |
Senior Industry Specialist, Digital Accessibility |
W3C Accessibility Standards Contributor |

"I made this so long because I did not have time to make it shorter." -
Pascal "links go places, buttons do things"