Re: Target size Pre-CFC

Hi Melanie,

> -1 to removing lists from the Inline exception without some understanding / clarity on its impact on various types of links-in-lists with mixes of static text and no static text. For example this wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Americans_with_Disabilities_Act_of_1990<https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FAmericans_with_Disabilities_Act_of_1990&data=05%7C01%7Cacampbell%40nomensa.com%7Ce203fccb4dcd461b4d8408db30732fb6%7Cebea4ad6fbbf43bd8449c56e26692c35%7C0%7C0%7C638157043505770973%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=OTxmTbaQARjfQV%2B8BCdFo%2BYhI6fBnLGTB1m40QXNjUY%3D&reserved=0>, under the References, Further Reading, External links sections.

Acknowledging that I would have preferred to keep that, the last part of the bullet should align the results. We can use the previous work to include examples in the understanding document.

The negative (that I raised yesterday) is that including visible lists explicitly makes it quicker and easier to assess what is in/out of scope. However, the results shouldn’t be very different.

From the example Wikipedia page:
- References, further reading: Each have non-link text in the list items defining the height, therefore meeting the exception.
- External links: Some of them have non-link text defining the height, so those definitely meet the exception. We should include in the understanding whether, because they are part of the same list, that exception applies to all items in the list.

The one which would change is “See also” (above references). Those links would not be exempt because there is no non-link text.

Kind regards,

-Alastair