Re: Decision to Restart CR or Not (Please review and reply by March 30th)

+1 to restarting CR

On Tue, 28 Mar 2023 at 23:58, Bradley Montgomery, Rachael L <
rmontgomery@loc.gov> wrote:

> Hello,
>
>
>
> At this point we have several suggested changes to Focus Appearance and
> Target Size to address concerns raised during Candidate Review (CR). Making
> these normative changes will require we reenter CR and slip publication to
> June.
>
>
>
> We need to make a decision about whether those changes are worth
> restarting CR and slipping publication to the June timeframe.  This is a
> straw poll to get a sense from the group where everyone stands.
>
>
>
> Do you believe we should:
>
>
>
> 1.       Leave Focus Appearance and Target Size text as is in the current
> draft,
> <https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2FWCAG22%2F&data=05%7C01%7Cacampbell%40nomensa.com%7C3ac63205d9eb43ee734808db2fcd8c2e%7Cebea4ad6fbbf43bd8449c56e26692c35%7C0%7C0%7C638156332094132675%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=6E8lubvB1ttfuObfM%2BCGZiJcJ6iIp13zyzXWxk4I2Yo%3D&reserved=0>
> transition to PR, and publish on schedule, or
>
> 2.       Update the text and restart CR, publishing in the June timeframe?
>
>
>
> The changes discussed at today’s meeting and in other email threads are:
>
>
>
> ·         Target Size Pull Request
> <https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fw3c%2Fwcag%2Fpull%2F3123%2Ffiles%23diff-a30d6476d02e45a066c55e8e174fe5381088cb0a3862e9c2e4eb3bbdf695c007&data=05%7C01%7Cacampbell%40nomensa.com%7C3ac63205d9eb43ee734808db2fcd8c2e%7Cebea4ad6fbbf43bd8449c56e26692c35%7C0%7C0%7C638156332094132675%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=zMzpD6IWy0tWdJtUKP9IXSn2A8wN3R0PpOCzaEdm4I8%3D&reserved=0>
>
> ·         Change Focus Appearance to:
>
> When the keyboard focus indicator
> <https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2FWCAG22%2F%23dfn-focus-indicator&data=05%7C01%7Cacampbell%40nomensa.com%7C3ac63205d9eb43ee734808db2fcd8c2e%7Cebea4ad6fbbf43bd8449c56e26692c35%7C0%7C0%7C638156332094132675%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=vbZGQO8b9YYk4pZS%2BQdHvKNu231HAEteQkbE4dCryWE%3D&reserved=0> is
> visible, an area of the focus indicator meets all the following:
>
> o    is at least as large as the area of a 2 CSS pixel
> <https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2FWCAG22%2F%23dfn-css-pixels&data=05%7C01%7Cacampbell%40nomensa.com%7C3ac63205d9eb43ee734808db2fcd8c2e%7Cebea4ad6fbbf43bd8449c56e26692c35%7C0%7C0%7C638156332094132675%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=tEwJT26vCHazgTPD8fkSHxuR3Oycb52MejV2shixXG0%3D&reserved=0>
>  thick perimeter
> <https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2FWCAG22%2F%23dfn-perimeter&data=05%7C01%7Cacampbell%40nomensa.com%7C3ac63205d9eb43ee734808db2fcd8c2e%7Cebea4ad6fbbf43bd8449c56e26692c35%7C0%7C0%7C638156332094132675%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=FlacyyN5g%2B39KVCmeOQGZ8bTJsLAMCnCxkSBM5tullQ%3D&reserved=0> of
> the unfocused component or sub-component, and
>
>    - has a contrast ratio of at least 3:1 between the same pixels in the
>    focused and unfocused states.
>
> I’ve included the changes above to simplify hunting but please limit your
> response on this thread to whether you think the changes are worth slipping
> the schedule.
>
> Kind regards,
>
>
>
> Rachael
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---
>
> Rachael Bradley Montgomery, PhD
>
> Digital Accessibility Architect
>
> Library of Congress
>
> Email: rmontgomery@loc.gov
>