Re: WCAG 2.x Editorial updates

Alastair writes:
>  <ol> used instead of <ul> when no order is intended/necessary

Errmm... isn't that the other way around? That *<ul>* is used when no order
is intended? (It may just be the way this was written, but noting it just
in case...)

JF

On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 7:21 AM Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
>
>
> These have been merged.
>
>
>
> *From: *Alastair Campbell
> *Date: *Tuesday, 22 August 2023 at 15:22
> *To: *WCAG list
> *Subject: *WCAG 2.x Editorial updates
>
> Hi everyone,
>
>
>
> A while back we discussed doing asynchronous approvals of minor changes to
> the informative WCAG 2.x documents.
>
>
>
> We’ll refine this process when the new Task Force is started, but in the
> meantime, I thought we could beta-test this process.
>
>
>
> This is a short list of a few backlog items:
>
>
> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pulls?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+label%3AAsync-Approval
> +
>
>
>
> If any of these appear to create problems, or you think should not be
> merged: Please reply in the github thread or to this email by the 30th
> August.
>
> +1s are not required for this type of (largely editorial) changes to
> informative documents. We will default to merging unless problems are
> spotted.
>
>
>
> If you don’t respond by then we will merge it, but if you later
> spot/discover a problem, that’s ok, we can do a similar update in future.
>
>
>
> *Overview of PRs / Changes*
>
>
>
> Reformat definition lists, ordered lists, fix Reading Level understanding
> <https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3296> #3296
>
>    - seems back in the WCAG 2.0 days, definition lists weren't used. This
>    retrospectively fixes it
>    - <ol> used instead of <ul> when no order is intended/necessary
>    - fix the completely broken listing of education levels for Reading
>    Level understanding
>
>
>
> Tweak 2.4.6 Headings and Labels understanding
> <https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3295> #3295
>
> Remove incorrect suggestion that headings/labels should make sense out of
> context, reformat lists (particularly what seemed to be a definition list,
> but marked up with <strong>?)
>
>
>
> Follow-up changes to 1.4.3 and 1.4.6 understanding documents
> <https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3216> #3216
>
>    - corrects a mistake where the text about focus/hover in 1.4.6
>    understanding talks about 1.4.3 applying also to focus/hover, when it
>    actually means to say that THIS SC applies here as well. this PR now
>    generalises that text to just say "This Success Criterion"
>    - adds a <code> block that was missed out for the contrast formula
>    - reformats the contrast formula rationale part for enhanced contrast,
>    to bring it in line with the same text in the minimum contrast understanding
>    - tweaks the rationale to mention 1.4.6 in relation to 7:1 ratio
>
>
>
>
>
> Update text alternative for target size (minimum) understanding
> illustrations <https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3190> #3190
>
>    - corrects the incomplete alt for the target-spacing-toolbar example
>    - expands the alt for a few of the following illustrations
>
>
>
> 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"