Re: Comments (was CFC - WCAG 2.1/2.2 errata)

+1

I'm fine with all the changes.


On Tue, Nov 5, 2024 at 5:58 AM Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
wrote:

> Hi Wilco,
>
>
>
> On each of those:
>
>
>
> - https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3776/files#r1751701618
>
> Removing a pair of brackets in regular text, so minor editorial.
> Personally, I think it reads better than the alternative way of saying that.
>
> Chair hat on: We could go either way, and I’ll note if others have strong
> reasoning for a change to that.
>
>
> - https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3038/files#r1829134724
>
> There is a definition that includes the singular, I’ve linked to that in
> the comment.
>
>
> - https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3776/files#r1751701618
>
> Repeat of the 1st item.
>
>
> - https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3362/files#r1829151465
>
> In the definition for “programmatically determined link context” you don’t
> want to link to an evergreen spec. The WCAG 2 issues TF has been doing that
> in the informative docs for a while. I can’t remember off-hand what the
> issues with linking to fixed versions was, but for defining what an HTML
> paragraph, it should be as stable a resource as any.
>
>
> - https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3539#pullrequestreview-2292988933
>
> You don’t want to remove transaction amount from input purpose. This was
> replied to (and rebutted) on the pre-CfC email thread and in the github
> thread. In summary: A single financial transaction is not stable
> information about a user, and arguably isn’t included by the normative SC
> language as it stands.
>
> Chair hat on: I’ll note if others disagree with this aspect in this thread
> or the CFC thread.
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
>
>
> -Alastair
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> @alastc / www.nomensa.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *Wilco Fiers <wilco.fiers@deque.com>
> *Date: *Tuesday, 5 November 2024 at 11:03
> *To: *Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
> *Cc: *WCAG list (w3c-wai-gl@w3.org) <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> *Subject: *Re: CFC - WCAG 2.1/2.2 errata
>
> -1, several issues from the pre-CFC have not been responded to / addressed:
>
>
>
> My comments are in the various PRs:
> - https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3776/files#r1751701618
> - https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3038/files#r1829134724
> - https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3776/files#r1751701618
> - https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3362/files#r1829151465
> - https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3539#pullrequestreview-2292988933
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 4, 2024 at 11:54 PM Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
>
>
> Call For Consensus — ends 8th November 2024 at 5pm Boston time.
>
>
>
> There are a few minor normative (errata) updates to WCAG 2.1/2.2 which we
> would like to make, and re-publish so they are on the face of the specs.
>
>
>
> All of these are things the group has reviewed and approved individually,
> so the forthcoming CFC is to check the group is happy to publish these in
> 2.1 and 2.2.
>
>
>
> Few would apply to WCAG 2.0 so we aren’t proposing to add errata for 2.0.
>
>
>
> Since the pre-CFC email two of the items have been updated based on
> feedback, and three have been added, marked below.
>
>
>
> Applying to 2.2:
>
>
>
>    - Make "cognitive function test" definition term lowercase, aligning
>    with other terms. https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3943/files
>    - Update to the focus-appearance note, aligning with the final text.
>    https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3657/files
>    - Updating the ‘new’ markers in 2.2.
>    https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/1481/files
>    - Removing the un-used definition for encloses.
>    https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3636/files
>    - Editorial updates to the target-size (min) SC text.
>    https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3189/files
>    - Missing comma in introduction.
>    https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3938/files
>
>
>
> Applying to 2.1 and 2.2:
>
>    - Updating the definition of single-pointer, separating the a note off
>    for clarification.
>    https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3536/files
>    UPDATED since the Pre-CFC email with this PR:
>    https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/4070
>    - Linking up various definitions where they have not been linked
>    before (caught as part of the WCAG2ICT work).
>    UPDATED since the Pre-CFC email.
>    https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3038/files
>    - Change "tablets...mobile devices" to a better structure without
>    suggesting tablets are not mobile devices (small update to the
>    introduction).
>    https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3776/files
>    - Changing <ol> to <ul> when no order is intended.
>    https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3756/files
>    - Updating the style of the input purposes for syntax highlighting.
>    https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3380/files
>    - Updating the programmatically determined link-text definition to
>    disambiguate lists and list-items.
>    https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3362/files
>    - Updating a “WCAG 2.1” reference to “WCAG 2”, so it works in both.
>    https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3707/files
>    - Update Input Purposes list to remove transaction-amount.
>    https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3539/files
>    - Style updates, things like lowercasing “web page” (NEW since pre-CFC)
>    https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/4080/files
>    - Capitalisation fixes in the Parsing note for WCAG 2.1 (NEW since
>    pre-CFC)
>    https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3154/files
>    - Fix typo/incorrect word in input purpose listing (NEW since pre-CFC)
>    https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/4034/files
>    - Update changelog in guidelines/index.html (NEW since pre-CFC)
>    https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/4123
>
>
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> *Wilco Fiers*
>
> Axe-core & Axe-linter product owner - WCAG 3 Project Manager - Facilitator
> ACT Task Force
>
>
>