public-comments-wcag20@w3.org from March 2011: by subject

(None currently documented) stands at the beginning of examples, although examples are available

31 March 2011 Agenda =======================================

Check for CSS seems less useful than test for use of deprecated elements (e.g., font, center, strike, i, b, u)

Difficult word to grasp

either/or test seems incorrect: #2 must be true

Equivalence of content of noembed element not explicitly checked

Expanding acronym of WCAG 2.0 in the document title

F61: 24 hours?

Failure Example 4

G150: procedure and policy

G93: SC 1.2.4

G97: Only "immediately following the expanded form"?

H82 missing?

H89: certainly cannot be a sufficient technique

I feel that the 2 sufficient techniques should be 'and' not 'or'.

I think there is a failure missing

last line of test redundant

Make title of a document easier to identify

Missing explicit requirement that styleswitcher be positioned at the top of the page

no link to single file from http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/Overview.html

None currently documented should not be there

Note at end of sufficient techniques for 3.3.2 is ambiguous

Requirement for 200% text increase nearly impossilbe to meet in most cases

Reword G1 'Description' and 'Note'. (This will make "Skip to Main" as a permanent visible link)

SC 3.2.1 Keyboard users only?

SCR19 applies to SC 3.2.2 too

SM6, SM7: SC 1.2.5

SM7: Expected Results

Sufficient techniques- definition and guidance

Table of Content needs summary of collections

Techniques for WCAG 2.0: T3: Using standard text formatting conventions for headings (TXT)

techniques link to 20081211 version

Test contradicts other options to meet SC 1.4.4

Test does not check top position of link or mechanism

Test does not cover appropriateness of audio description

Test for percent is in itself not meaningful, should encompass %, em, font size names

Test in G68 does not seem to fit

Test needs specification of window size and criteria for compliance

Test whether all th Elements have scope attribute misleading

The second part of the description

The test for the correct use of longdesc should be conditional on its application

The test should include a check whether the function to turn off blinking content is documented

Title that may confuse the reader

Translation of an easy-to-read text

Two instances of "call the up the class"

Understanding WCAG 2- SC 1.3.1

Understanding WCAG 2- SC 2.4.3

use of fieldset should not be required for any group of logically related input elements

WCAG 2techniques for SC 1.3.2 and 2.4.3

Word replacement

wrong success criteria association

Last message date: Tuesday, 29 March 2011 21:29:09 UTC