W3C

Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 Errata

Last modified: $Date: 2009/10/22 21:18:28 $

Copyright (©) 2008 W3C® (MIT, ERCIM, Keio), All Rights Reserved. W3C liability, trademark and document use rules apply.

Abstract

This document records all known errors in the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 specification.

The errata are numbered, classified as Substantive or Editorial, and listed in reverse chronological order of their date of publication in each category.

Each entry has the following information:

Substantive corrections are proposed by the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group (part of the Web Accessibility Initiative), which has consensus that they are appropriate; they are not to be considered normative until approved by a Call for Review of Proposed Corrections or a Call for Review of an Edited Recommendation.

Please view the public comment instructions if you would like to comment to the Working Group. Comments submitted are publicly available in the archive for the WCAG 2.0 public comments mailing list.

Table of Contents

1 Substantive Errata
2 Editorial Errata

1 Substantive Errata

No substantive errata at present

2 Editorial Errata

  1. Success Criterion 1.1.1 point "Controls, Input" has a reference to Guideline 4.1 for additional requirements for controls and content that accepts user input. It would be more accurate and clear if the note referred to Success Criterion 4.1.2. Success Criterion 4.1.2 requires that user interface components have a name, role, state, property and value. This is closely related to the requirements that SC 1.1.1 places on user interface controls to have a name that describes its purpose.
  2. Success Criterion 1.4.3 point "Logotypes" states "Text that is part of a logo or brand name has no minimum contrast requirement." The word "minimum", not used in the other points, implies a difference in meaning that is not intended. For clarity and consistency, remove the word "minimum" from this point.
  3. The definition of idiom includes the Dutch phrase "Hij ging met de kippen op stok". This phrase was incorrectly marked with the language code "ne"; it should have been marked with the language code "nl".