Open dan-tripp-siteimprove opened 1 year ago
Some of these discussions might be moved to the background section instead (e.g. the discussion about presentational/hidden/decorative.
I can do that. How about I move Inapplicable Examples 3 and 4 to the Background section?
I would suggest @dan-tripp-siteimprove opens an issue to discuss these points, and rewrite the example description is a less verbose manner. @carlosapaduarte That's fair. I haven't opened a new issue yet - I'll discuss it in-person first. I did rewrite the example description and pushed another commit (d161d08ba6eba31686eee65f35f54bc425725e79). Let me know what you think.
@dan-tripp-siteimprove I think what's here is fine. Is it worth mentioning for Inapplicable 4 that that issue is covered by another rule (https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/act/rules/6cfa84/)?
@dan-tripp-siteimprove I think what's here is fine. Is it worth mentioning for Inapplicable 4 that that issue is covered by another rule (https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/act/rules/6cfa84/)?
I think yes, and I just did it in commit d7ea3d32c889b8a2deb9f1273337c19599ceebae. Thank you.
Adding examples to rule presentational-children-no-focusable-content-307n5z. Mostly uncontroversial, I think, except for Inapplicable Example 4 ("At the time of writing..."), which I expect will ruffle some feathers.
Closes issue(s): none
Need for Call for Review: This will not require a Call for Review : editorial changes (including to the applicability, expectation or examples section)
Pull Request Etiquette
When creating PR:
develop
branch (left side).After creating PR:
Rule
,Definition
orChore
.When merging a PR:
How to Review And Approve