Edit comment LC-492 for Accessibility Guidelines Working Group

Quick access to

Previous: LC-1173 Next: LC-716

Comment LC-492: Comment Shortname:; Commenter: Jason White <jasonw@ariel.its.unimelb.edu.au>; Message-id:; Section of the document concerned:

or; Refinement of the section concerned:; Status:
assigned to; Type:; Resolution status:
Response drafted Resolution implemented Reply sent to commenter; Response status:
No response from Commenter yet Commenter approved disposition Commenter objected to disposition
Commenter's response (URI):; Comment:
Part of Item:
Comment Type: ED
Comment (Including rationale for any proposed change):

Whereas guideline 2.2 is framed in terms of "time limits" on reading and interaction. criterion 2.2.1 instead uses the term "time-out". Neither "time limit" nor "time-out" is defined. This difference in terminology raises the question of whether there is meant to be a distinction between the two concepts. I don't think there is, or ought to be, such a distinction.

Proposed Change:

Use the term "time limits" in 2.2.1, in the same sense as in the text of guideline 2.2 itself. More generally, use "time limit" wherever "time-out" appears in WCAG 2.0. If appropriate, add a glossary entry to clarify the meaning of the term - I think the text of guideline 2.2 is a clear and precise formulation of what is meant.; Related issues: (space separated ids); WG Notes: [TEAMC] Surveyed 18 May 2006 Closed with proposed response, 18 May 2006 http://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/20060518-teamc/; Resolution: Time-out is a specific type of time limit. Time-out is the correct term for SC 2.2.1. Time-out is a commonly understood term on the Web and we are not using it in a special way, so we don't think it needs a definition.; (Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)