14:38:25 <RRSAgent> RRSAgent has joined #wcag2ict
14:38:30 <RRSAgent> logging to https://www.w3.org/2026/02/19-wcag2ict-irc
14:38:30 <Zakim> agenda cleared
14:38:30 <Zakim> RRSAgent, make logs Public
14:38:31 <Zakim> Meeting: WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference
14:38:38 <PhilDay> chair:  PhilDay
14:38:46 <PhilDay> meeting:  WCAG2ICT Task Force Teleconference
14:38:55 <PhilDay> rrsagent, make minutes
14:38:57 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/02/19-wcag2ict-minutes.html PhilDay
14:39:40 <PhilDay> Zakim, please time speakers at 2 minutes
14:39:40 <Zakim> ok, PhilDay
14:39:50 <PhilDay> agenda+ Announcements
14:39:50 <PhilDay> agenda+ Question 2 - Adding Level AAA into the introduction section of WCAG2ICT Group Note
14:39:50 <PhilDay> agenda+ Question 4 - 1.2.6 Sign Language (Prerecorded)
14:39:50 <PhilDay> agenda+ Question 5 -  (Part 1 of 2) 1.3.6 Identify Purpose
14:39:52 <PhilDay> agenda+ Question 6 - (Part 2 of 2) 1.3.6 Identify Purpose
14:39:59 <PhilDay> agenda?
14:40:17 <PhilDay> regrets: Daniel Montalvo Charameli
14:40:23 <PhilDay> present+
14:40:35 <PhilDay> rrsagent, make minutes
14:40:36 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/02/19-wcag2ict-minutes.html PhilDay
14:41:09 <PhilDay> agenda?
14:52:47 <PhilDay> scribe+ PhilDay
14:59:48 <LauraM> LauraM has joined #WCAG2ICT
14:59:55 <LauraM> present+
15:01:05 <loicmn> loicmn has joined #wcag2ict
15:01:23 <loicmn> present+
15:02:50 <bbailey> bbailey has joined #wcag2ict
15:03:01 <bbailey> present+
15:03:15 <LauraM> scribe+ LauraM
15:03:30 <LauraM> Agenda?
15:03:53 <LauraM> zakim, next item
15:03:53 <Zakim> agendum 1 -- Announcements -- taken up [from PhilDay]
15:04:07 <PhilDay> New W3C Google doc space Daniel created at: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1ad-D32T0NTsc3EqbgJtPp1NBpLRmRtAi
15:04:10 <LauraM> PhilDay: We have moved the google docs to the W3C space
15:04:20 <LauraM> PhilDay: If you need access, email Daniel
15:04:32 <PhilDay> o	Link to level AAA status table on wiki: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/wiki/Adding-Level-AAA-%E2%80%90-status-table
15:04:36 <GreggVan> GreggVan has joined #wcag2ict
15:04:40 <PhilDay> o	Link to project board view: https://github.com/orgs/w3c/projects/13
15:05:12 <LauraM> PhilDay: There are many items left on the table
15:05:28 <LauraM> PhilDay: Look at the items and assign yourself to items and draft content
15:05:37 <PhilDay> o Link to level AAA status table on wiki: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/wiki/Adding-Level-AAA-%E2%80%90-status-table
15:06:24 <LauraM> zakim, next item
15:06:24 <Zakim> agendum 2 -- Question 2 - Adding Level AAA into the introduction section of WCAG2ICT Group Note -- taken up [from PhilDay]
15:06:30 <PhilDay> •	Link to the survey results: https://www.w3.org/wbs/55145/AAA-take-two/results/
15:06:38 <PhilDay> •	Link to q2: https://www.w3.org/wbs/55145/AAA-take-two/results/#xq2
15:06:44 <PhilDay> •	Link to pull request 832: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/pull/832
15:07:04 <LauraM> PhilDay: Bruce was doing edits last week, Maryjo and Bruce went through iterations.
15:07:24 <LauraM> PhilDay: Most thought that PR832 was ready to merge.
15:07:42 <bbailey> q+
15:07:53 <PhilDay> •	Mary Jo reiterated his suggested changes in a suggestion - https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/pull/832/changes#r2800523225
15:07:57 <PhilDay> ack bbailey
15:08:02 <LauraM> ack bbailey
15:08:30 <LauraM> BBailey: We should do this in two passes, one for minor edits and one that has the diff preview.
15:08:49 <PhilDay> bbailey: diff preview of Bruce's latest content: https://services.w3.org/htmldiff?doc1=https://w3c.github.io/wcag2ict/&doc2=https://deploy-preview-832--wcag2ict.netlify.app#introduction
15:09:51 <LauraM> Gregg: Changing from "standards" to "regulations" is inaccurate. EN301 549 is a standard not a regulation. Could use standards and regulations.
15:11:24 <Daniel> q+ to say framing rules as testing techniques could help remediate some of the concerns
15:12:14 <LauraM> ack Daniel
15:12:14 <Zakim> Daniel, you wanted to say framing rules as testing techniques could help remediate some of the concerns
15:12:44 <PhilDay> Suggested change
15:12:44 <PhilDay> It is not recommended that WCAG 2 conformance be required as a general policy for all non-web documents and software because it is not possible to satisfy all success criteria for some non-web ICT.
15:12:44 <PhilDay> WCAG2ICT is useful as guidance for policy makers and other regulators to assess how WCAG 2 can be applied to non-web documents and software. However, because it is not possible to satisfy all success criteria for some non-web ICT, it is not recommended as a general policy that unmodified WCAG 2 success criteria be applied for all non-web documents
15:12:44 <PhilDay> and software.
15:13:06 <PhilDay> Daniel's suggested edit: WCAG2ICT is useful as guidance for policy makers and other regulators to assess how WCAG 2 can be applied to non-web documents and software. However, because it is not possible to satisfy all success criteria for some non-web ICT, it is not recommended as a general policy that unmodified WCAG 2 success criteria be applied
15:13:06 <PhilDay> for all non-web documents and software.
15:13:58 <PhilDay> Bruce's previous version (put by Mary Jo as a suggestion):
15:13:58 <PhilDay> WCAG2ICT is useful as guidance for policy for non-web documents and software and to inform conformance requirements for non-web documents and software. However, because it is not possible to satisfy all success criteria for some non-web ICT, it is not recommended as a general policy that unmodified WCAG 2 conformance be required for all non-web
15:13:58 <PhilDay> documents and software.
15:14:42 <PhilDay> Change from last week - we added a positive framing to the start.
15:15:09 <PhilDay> GreggVan: Seems contradictory - useful as guidance for policy, in the first sentence, then 2nd sentence says you should not use it unmodified
15:15:59 <LauraM> PhilDay: What is the proposal. Last week we decided to add a positive framing. How do we flip this to be positive.
15:16:08 <bbailey> q+
15:16:09 <PhilDay> Gregg - useful as recommendations, but not applied as requirements
15:16:10 <LauraM> GreggVan: Useful as recommendations but not as requirements.
15:16:15 <PhilDay> q?
15:16:44 <LauraM> GreggVan: They are important for people to do when they can and where they can
15:17:10 <PhilDay> ack bbailey
15:17:27 <LauraM> Bbailey: The assignment was to add a sentence or two about AAA success criteria.
15:17:49 <LauraM> Bbailey: I realized that what I would say would not be different from what I would say about AA and A SCs.
15:18:25 <LauraM> Bbailey: Maybe we could put a sentence in about why they are in a different section.
15:19:37 <PhilDay> Daniel's suggested change:
15:19:37 <PhilDay> WCAG2ICT is useful as guidance for policy makers and other regulators to assess how WCAG 2 can be applied to non-web documents and software. However, because it is not possible to satisfy all success criteria for some non-web ICT, it is not recommended as a general policy that unmodified WCAG 2 success criteria be applied for all non-web documents
15:19:37 <PhilDay> and software.
15:19:37 <PhilDay> Gregg's edit to Daniel's
15:19:39 <PhilDay> WCAG2ICT is useful as recommendations for policy makers and other regulators to assess how WCAG 2 can be applied to non-web documents and software. However, because it is not possible to satisfy all success criteria for some non-web ICT, it is not recommended as a general policy that unmodified WCAG 2 success criteria be applied as requirements for
15:19:39 <PhilDay> all non-web documents and software.
15:19:42 <PhilDay> q?
15:20:08 <LauraM> PhilDay: Let's go after the contentious section and then go back
15:20:43 <PhilDay> PR: https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/pull/832
15:20:50 <bbailey> https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/pull/832#discussion_r2828386547
15:21:13 <PhilDay> Bruce's softened version:
15:21:13 <PhilDay> WCAG2ICT is useful as guidance for policy makers and other regulators to assess how WCAG 2 can be applied to non-web documents and software in addressing accessibility of non-web ICT. However, because it is not possible to satisfy some success criteria for some non-web ICT, it is not recommended as a general policy that all WCAG 2 success criteria
15:21:13 <PhilDay> be applied without modication to some non-web documents and software.
15:21:31 <LauraM> GreggVan: Don't like this one because it says the same things as before
15:22:00 <LauraM> By swapping non web for web, it's a problem
15:22:38 <PhilDay> Bruce + Gregg's changes
15:22:39 <PhilDay> WCAG2ICT is useful as recommendations for policy makers and other regulators to assess how WCAG 2 can be applied to non-web documents and software in addressing accessibility of non-web ICT. However, because it is not possible to satisfy some success criteria for some non-web ICT, it is not recommended as a general policy that all WCAG 2 success
15:22:39 <PhilDay> criteria be applied without modification  as requirements to some non-web documents and software.
15:23:15 <LauraM>  GreggVan: Everything in our document is a recommendation.
15:23:37 <PhilDay> q?
15:24:15 <LauraM> GreggVan: Maybe we should adopt the other changes and then revisit this part
15:25:18 <PhilDay> q?
15:25:22 <bbailey> q+
15:25:40 <LauraM> ack bbailey
15:26:11 <LauraM> Bbailey: Let's change to Level AAA SC is useful as guidance.
15:26:29 <PhilDay> WCAG2ICT Level AAA SC are useful as recommendations for policy makers and other regulators to assess how WCAG 2 can be applied to non-web documents and software in addressing accessibility of non-web ICT. However, because it is not possible to satisfy some success criteria for some non-web ICT, it is not recommended as a general policy that all
15:26:29 <PhilDay> WCAG 2 success criteria be applied without modification  as requirements to some non-web documents and software.
15:26:36 <LauraM> GreggVan: I think the current one, if you change to AAA, still has it's own problem.
15:26:55 <PhilDay> Level AAA SC are useful as recommendations for policy makers and other regulators to assess how WCAG 2 can be applied to non-web documents and software in addressing accessibility of non-web ICT. However, because it is not possible to satisfy some success criteria for some non-web ICT, it is not recommended as a general policy that all WCAG 2
15:26:55 <PhilDay> success criteria be applied without modification  as requirements to some non-web documents and software.
15:27:27 <LauraM> Bbailey: Do we not want the word recommendation twice?
15:27:47 <LauraM> GreggVan: It's the use of the word "recommendation" is in the wrong place in the sentence. And the whole document is a recommendation.
15:27:53 <bbailey> It is not recommended that Level AAA conformance be required as a general policy for entire sites because it is not possible to satisfy all Level AAA success criteria for some content.
15:28:58 <Sam> Sam has joined #wcag2ict
15:29:07 <Sam> present +
15:29:28 <Sam> why dont use optional
15:29:29 <bbailey> It is not recommended that WCAG Level AAA success criteria be required as a general policy for non-web ict because it is not possible to satisfy all Level AAA success criteria for some content.
15:29:47 <LauraM> Because it is not possible to satisfy all Level AAA success criteria for some content, Level AAA conformance may not be required as a general policy.
15:30:10 <LauraM> q+
15:30:27 <PhilDay> ack LauraM
15:30:52 <PhilDay> LauraM: Reword the sentence, shorten, and change order to help.
15:31:08 <PhilDay> q?
15:31:15 <Sam> q+
15:31:27 <LauraM> GreggVan: "May not" is not the right word.
15:32:24 <PhilDay> ack Sam
15:32:44 <GreggVan> q+
15:33:26 <bbailey> Because it is not possible to satisfy all Level AAA success criteria for some content, it is not recommended that Level AAA success criteria be required as a general policy.
15:33:28 <LauraM> Sam: Level AAA doesn't apply to some content. Bruce's statement is pretty good. Why do we keep referring back when we can state "don't do this as a requirement".
15:33:40 <PhilDay> q?
15:33:43 <LauraM> ack GreggVan
15:33:43 <PhilDay> ack GreggVan
15:33:51 <GreggVan> It is not recommended that Level AAA conformance be required as a general policy for entire sites because it is not possible to satisfy all Level AAA success criteria for some content.
15:34:16 <bbailey> https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/#cc1
15:34:22 <LauraM> GreggVan: Bruce's comes close but we are talking about non web not sites, that's one problem with the sentence.
15:34:34 <bbailey> Note 2:  It is not recommended that Level AAA conformance be required as a general policy for entire sites because it is not possible to satisfy all Level AAA success criteria for some content.
15:34:36 <LauraM> We are talking about non web ICT.
15:34:53 <PhilDay> q?
15:35:29 <LauraM> q+
15:35:52 <PhilDay> q?
15:35:55 <bbailey> Because it is not possible to satisfy all Level AAA success criteria for some content, it is not recommended that Level AAA conformance be required as a general policy for entire sites.
15:36:07 <PhilDay> ack LauraM
15:36:34 <GreggVan> q+
15:36:52 <PhilDay> Laura: Because it is not possible to satisfy all Level AAA success criteria for some content, it is not recommended that Level AAA success criteria be required as a general policy. (or with entire sites).
15:36:56 <PhilDay> q?
15:37:01 <PhilDay> ack GreggVan
15:37:24 <bbailey> Because it is not possible to satisfy all Level AAA success criteria for some content, it is not recommended that Level AAA conformance be required as a general policy for non-web ICT.
15:37:31 <bbailey> q+
15:37:43 <PhilDay> q?
15:37:52 <Sam> q+
15:38:09 <PhilDay> q?
15:38:13 <PhilDay> ack bbailey
15:38:16 <Sam> q-
15:38:48 <LauraM> Sam: Bruce changed it to non web ICT
15:38:48 <bbailey> > Because it is not possible to satisfy all Level AAA success criteria for some non-web content, it is not recommended that Level AAA conformance be required as a general policy for non-web ict.
15:39:16 <LauraM> +1
15:39:21 <Sam> +1
15:39:25 <loicmn> +1
15:40:11 <bbailey> Because it is not possible to satisfy all Level AAA success criteria for some non-web documents and software, it is not recommended that Level AAA conformance be required as a general policy for entire sites.
15:40:31 <PhilDay> q?
15:40:32 <LauraM> q+
15:40:40 <PhilDay> ack LauraM
15:40:46 <loicmn> Yes, we use non-web content in WCAG2ICT:https://www.w3.org/TR/wcag2ict-22/#content-on-and-off-the-web
15:40:58 <PhilDay> q?
15:41:19 <LauraM> GreggVan: ICT should be used in both places
15:41:52 <bbailey> Note 2:  It is not recommended that Level AAA conformance be required as a general policy for entire sites because it is not possible to satisfy all Level AAA success criteria for some content.
15:42:05 <LauraM> GreggVan: Non web content in the beginning of the sentence and non web ICT in the end infers there is a difference in the meaning
15:42:17 <Sam> q+\
15:42:21 <PhilDay> bbailey: trying to keep consistent with note 2..
15:42:21 <Sam> q+
15:42:27 <PhilDay> ack Sam
15:42:33 <loicmn> q+ to say that in WCAG2ICT we have generalized "content"
15:42:42 <LauraM> Sam: Question for Gregg - if it used non web ICT in both places is that ok?
15:42:53 <LauraM> GreggVan: What does WCAG actually say?
15:43:00 <bbailey> https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/#cc1
15:43:09 <PhilDay> q?
15:43:16 <LauraM> ack \,
15:43:21 <PhilDay> ack loicmn
15:43:21 <Zakim> loicmn, you wanted to say that in WCAG2ICT we have generalized "content"
15:43:46 <LauraM> Loicmn: we do use content in WCAG2ICT as a generalized term so we can use content. We can also use non-web content.
15:43:52 <loicmn> https://www.w3.org/TR/wcag2ict-22/#content-on-and-off-the-web
15:44:08 <PhilDay> q?
15:44:09 <GreggVan> q=
15:44:16 <bbailey> Because it is not possible to satisfy all Level AAA success criteria for some non-web ict, it is not recommended that Level AAA conformance be required as a general policy for non-web documents and software.
15:44:21 <LauraM> ack GreggVan
15:44:21 <PhilDay> ack GreggVan
15:44:49 <bbailey> q+
15:44:54 <LauraM> GreggVan: Since we are WCAG2ICT we should probably use something consistently such as "ICT" which gets it away from content.
15:45:06 <PhilDay> q+ to suggest non-web documents and software as an alternative
15:45:13 <Sam> +1 to Bruce suggestion
15:45:29 <PhilDay> ack bbailey
15:45:32 <LauraM> ack \,
15:45:34 <bbailey> ack
15:45:36 <GreggVan> acl \
15:46:00 <LauraM> Because it is not possible to satisfy all Level AAA success criteria for some non-web ict, it is not recommended that Level AAA conformance be required as a general policy for non-web documents and software.
15:46:39 <LauraM> bbailey: Because we are modeling note 2, general and then broader, we should do something similar with our statement is more consistent with the note.
15:46:48 <Sam> vote?
15:47:09 <LauraM> q?
15:47:30 <PhilDay> POLL. Are you happy with bbailey's latest as posted by Laura above?
15:47:36 <loicmn> +1
15:47:36 <LauraM> q-\,
15:47:40 <bbailey> +1
15:47:44 <LauraM> +1
15:47:45 <PhilDay> q- PhilDay
15:47:56 <GreggVan> +1
15:47:56 <Sam> +1
15:48:54 <PhilDay> DRAFT RESOLUTION: For the introductory paragraph, incorporate the latest content: "Because it is not possible to satisfy all Level AAA success criteria for some non-web ict, it is not recommended that Level AAA conformance be required as a general policy for non-web documents and software."
15:49:06 <bbailey> +1
15:49:10 <Sam> +1
15:49:22 <GreggVan> +1
15:49:31 <loicmn> +1
15:49:38 <LauraM> +1
15:49:38 <PhilDay> RESOLUTION: For the introductory paragraph, incorporate the latest content: "Because it is not possible to satisfy all Level AAA success criteria for some non-web ict, it is not recommended that Level AAA conformance be required as a general policy for non-web documents and software."
15:50:13 <PhilDay> GreggVan: Editorial - suggest non-web documents and software in both places.
15:50:40 <LauraM> q+
15:50:48 <PhilDay> ack LauraM
15:51:28 <LauraM> q+
15:51:34 <bbailey> I think we *do* mean two different things
15:51:40 <PhilDay> q?
15:51:54 <PhilDay> ack LauraM
15:51:56 <bbailey> q+
15:52:31 <PhilDay> LauraM: referenced 2 different ways in the original WCAG2 NOTE 2 - as they had broad and then specific.
15:52:35 <PhilDay> ack bbailey
15:52:41 <GreggVan> q+
15:53:11 <PhilDay> ack GreggVan
15:53:21 <LauraM> bbailey: We use both terms, non-web ICT includes hardware and other things but for applying, we meant non web documents and software.
15:53:30 <loicmn> q+ To say the original uses two terms - content, web sites - and we should use two. Suggest content, non-web documents and software.
15:53:35 <LauraM> GreggVan: Then we need to define them as two different things.
15:53:50 <PhilDay> q?
15:53:59 <bbailey> q+ for someone to do editorial pass on "non-web ICT"
15:54:19 <PhilDay> ack loicmn
15:54:19 <Zakim> loicmn, you wanted to say the original uses two terms - content, web sites - and we should use two. Suggest content, non-web documents and software.
15:54:37 <LauraM> Loicmn: ICT  includes hardware. So we should go back to what we had originally
15:54:45 <PhilDay> loicmn: suggest we go back to non-web content, and then non-web documents and software.
15:54:48 <Sam> q+
15:55:28 <PhilDay> Revised version: Because it is not possible to satisfy all Level AAA success criteria for some non-web content, it is not recommended that Level AAA conformance be required as a general policy for non-web documents and software."
15:55:30 <GreggVan> q+
15:55:37 <PhilDay> ack bbailey
15:55:37 <Zakim> bbailey, you wanted to discuss someone to do editorial pass on "non-web ICT"
15:55:58 <PhilDay> bbailey happy with Loic's suggestion - if not check non-web ICT elsewhere
15:56:26 <LauraM> Bbailey: Should we create a new issue to make sure we are using non web ICT correctly? PhilDay to check on this.
15:56:26 <PhilDay> q?
15:56:28 <PhilDay> ack Sam
15:56:56 <LauraM> Sam: I thought the whole reason to keep it that way was to keep it like the original WCAG note. Did we resolve and reopen?
15:57:08 <PhilDay> q?
15:57:13 <PhilDay> ack GreggVan
15:57:44 <LauraM> GreggVan: bruce raised the point that non web ICT includes hardware as well.
15:57:51 <Sam> Sam has joined #wcag2ict
15:58:09 <LauraM> WCAG provisions do not deal with hardware at all. They do not translate to everything.
15:58:24 <PhilDay> DRAFT RESOLUTION: Modify paragraph in introductory section to use "Because it is not possible to satisfy all Level AAA success criteria for some non-web content, it is not recommended that Level AAA conformance be required as a general policy for non-web documents and software."
15:58:39 <bbailey> +1
15:58:40 <LauraM> GreggVan: Where we say non web ICT we should change to content.
15:59:01 <loicmn> +1
15:59:02 <LauraM> +1 to draft resolution
15:59:06 <Sam> +1
15:59:27 <GreggVan> +1
15:59:27 <PhilDay>  RESOLUTION: Modify paragraph in introductory section to use "Because it is not possible to satisfy all Level AAA success criteria for some non-web content, it is not recommended that Level AAA conformance be required as a general policy for non-web documents and software."
16:00:02 <bbailey> ACTION:  Check draft's use of non-web ICT
16:00:15 <bbailey> zakim, draft minutes
16:00:15 <Zakim> I don't understand 'draft minutes', bbailey
16:00:27 <bbailey> RRSAgent, draft minutes
16:00:29 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/02/19-wcag2ict-minutes.html bbailey
16:00:35 <PhilDay> POLL: Are you happy to accept Bruce's other edits in https://services.w3.org/htmldiff?doc1=https://w3c.github.io/wcag2ict/&doc2=https://deploy-preview-832--wcag2ict.netlify.app#introduction
16:01:36 <loicmn> +1 to Bruce's changes
16:01:42 <PhilDay> +1 to Bruce's changes
16:02:03 <PhilDay> DRAFT RESOLUTION: Accept the remainder of Bruce's edits from PR 238 as discussed above
16:02:14 <loicmn> +1
16:02:17 <bbailey> +1
16:02:37 <bbailey> ACTION:  Editorial check for use of "regulation"
16:02:54 <PhilDay> ACTION: check where else we use non/web ICT and see if it includes hardware, and see if we can change to non-web content. Create issue
16:03:24 <GreggVan> +1
16:03:30 <PhilDay> RESOLUTION: Accept the remainder of Bruce's edits from PR 238 as discussed above
16:04:51 <PhilDay> o	rrsagent, make minutes
16:04:57 <PhilDay> rrsagent, make minutes
16:04:58 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/02/19-wcag2ict-minutes.html PhilDay
16:05:53 <PhilDay> o	Zakim, end meeting
16:05:57 <PhilDay> Zakim, end meeting
16:05:58 <Zakim> As of this point the attendees have been PhilDay, LauraM, loicmn, bbailey
16:06:00 <Zakim> RRSAgent, please draft minutes v2
16:06:01 <RRSAgent> I have made the request to generate https://www.w3.org/2026/02/19-wcag2ict-minutes.html Zakim
16:06:07 <Zakim> I am happy to have been of service, PhilDay; please remember to excuse RRSAgent.  Goodbye
16:06:08 <Zakim> Zakim has left #wcag2ict
16:06:10 <PhilDay> rrsagent, bye
16:06:10 <RRSAgent> I see 3 open action items saved in https://www.w3.org/2026/02/19-wcag2ict-actions.rdf :
16:06:10 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Check draft's use of non-web ICT [1]
16:06:10 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2026/02/19-wcag2ict-irc#T16-00-02
16:06:10 <RRSAgent> ACTION: Editorial check for use of "regulation" [2]
16:06:10 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2026/02/19-wcag2ict-irc#T16-02-37
16:06:10 <RRSAgent> ACTION: check where else we use non/web ICT and see if it includes hardware, and see if we can change to non-web content. Create issue [3]
16:06:10 <RRSAgent>   recorded in https://www.w3.org/2026/02/19-wcag2ict-irc#T16-02-54