This document:Public document·View comments·Disposition of Comments·
Nearby:Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Other specs in this tool Accessibility Guidelines Working Group's Issue tracker
Quick access to LC-2426 LC-2427 LC-2428 LC-2430 LC-2431 LC-2432 LC-2433 LC-2434 LC-2435 LC-2436 LC-2437 LC-2438 LC-2439 LC-2440 LC-2441 LC-2442 LC-2443 LC-2444 LC-2445 LC-2446 LC-2447 LC-2448 LC-2449 LC-2450 LC-2451 LC-2456 LC-2457 LC-2458 LC-2459 LC-2460 LC-2465 LC-2466 LC-2467 LC-2469 LC-2471 LC-2475 LC-2481 LC-2482 LC-2483 LC-2491 LC-2492 LC-2493 LC-2494 LC-2496 LC-2500
Previous: LC-2427 Next: LC-2456
It might be useful to clearly indicate the definition of the words "should" and "must" for the purpose of requirements versus recommendations. This would apply to all parts of WCAG 2.0. I mentioning it here on this technique (G141), because this is where I recently had a debate about what "should" means versus what "must" means. Proposed Change: Make it obvious that "should" is recommended while "must" is required. You could use the definitions found at http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt. You could also consider making the words "must" and "should" hotlink to the definition. Or, not. Just an idea.