w3c/wbs-design
or
by mail to sysreq
.
The results of this questionnaire are available to anybody.
This questionnaire was open from 2013-08-07 to 2013-08-16.
6 answers have been received.
Jump to results for question:
EO2. consider changing from "XYZ must ABC" to "XYZ are ABC", for example: from "Editing-views must be perceivable" to "Editing-views are perceivable"
Although the WCAG 2.0 Principles use "must" statements, there has been increasing attention on the use of RFC2119 words (must, should, may). Since we are a guideline, using the RFC2119 words is discouraged.
Principle A.1: Authoring tool user interfaces follow applicable accessibility guidelines
Principle A.2: Editing-views are perceivable
Principle A.3: Editing-views are operable
Principle A.4: Editing-views are understandable
Principle B.1: Fully automatic processes produce accessible content
Principle B.2: Authors are supported in producing accessible content
Principle B.3: Authors are supported in improving the accessibility of existing content
Principle B.4: Authoring tools promote and integrate their accessibility features
Choice | All responders |
---|---|
Results | |
Accept the proposal | 6 |
Recommend changes (see comments field) | |
The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field) | |
Disagree with the proposal (see comments field) | |
Neutral - will accept the consensus of the group |
Responder | EO2 - use of "MUST" in the Principles | EO2 |
---|---|---|
Jeanne F Spellman | Accept the proposal | |
Alessandro Miele | Accept the proposal | |
Frederick Boland | Accept the proposal | |
Jan Richards | Accept the proposal | |
Tom Babinszki | Accept the proposal | |
Alastair Campbell | Accept the proposal |
EO3. Guideline B.3.1.2 I don't understand this "instructions are provided from the check" - this phrase needs clarification.
Existing:
B.3.1.2 Help Authors Decide: If the authoring tool provides checks that require authors to decide whether a potential web content accessibility problem (WCAG) is correctly identified (i.e., manual checking and semi-automated checking), then instructions are provided from the check that describe how to decide. (Level A)
Proposed
B.3.1.2 Help Authors Decide: If the authoring tool provides checks *(also called an accessibility checker)* that require authors to decide whether a potential web content accessibility problem (WCAG) is correctly identified (i.e., manual checking and semi-automated checking), then instructions are provided from the *checker* that describe how to decide. (Level A)
Choice | All responders |
---|---|
Results | |
Accept the proposal | 5 |
Recommend changes (see comments field) | 1 |
The proposal needs more discussion (see comments field) | |
Disagree with the proposal (see comments field) | |
Neutral - will accept the consensus of the group |
Responder | EO3 comment on B.3.1.2 | EO3 |
---|---|---|
Jeanne F Spellman | Accept the proposal | |
Alessandro Miele | Accept the proposal | |
Frederick Boland | Accept the proposal | |
Jan Richards | Recommend changes (see comments field) | I don't like the "also called" wording, so how about... B.3.1.2 Help Authors Decide: If the authoring tool provides *accessibility checking* that relies on authors to decide whether potential web content accessibility problems (WCAG) are correctly identified (i.e., manual checking and semi-automated checking), then instructions are provided from the *checker* that describe how to decide. (Level A) |
Tom Babinszki | Accept the proposal | |
Alastair Campbell | Accept the proposal | The new wording is better, does it need to specify where the instructions come from? Could it just say "then instructions are provided that describe how to decide." |
Everybody has responded to this questionnaire.
Compact view of the results / list of email addresses of the responders
WBS home / Questionnaires / WG questionnaires / Answer this questionnaire
w3c/wbs-design
or
by mail to sysreq
.