Open a11ycob opened 5 years ago
An observation: Looking at 1.3.5, 1.3.6 and now 2.2.6, I wonder if (overall) the benefits for each group need to be more consistently presented. For example, 1.3.5 is well described, 1.3.6 is too brief and 2.2.6 somewhere in between. Otherwise, no comments.
This one is fairly straight forward. Potentially a bit of wordsmithing, otherwise it's good.
I thought this one was written well. No big problems from me. Agree with Vicki's observation about groups represented and how it helps. This one seems okay to me but we should watch this aspect in other success criterion we review.
Along with general wordsmithing that may be done, I found one typo that should be fixed. It is located in the second bullet of the examples... Published...
The notice indicates that a lack of activity for a continuous period of time that is greater than an hour will trigger initiate the time out process.
Should be...
The notice indicates that a lack of activity for a continuous period of time that is greater than an hour will initiate the time out process.
This Success Criterion helps people with many different cognitive disabilities, including people with: (Would add to this list:) anyone needing to multitask or complete tasks while being interrupted
In some ways, I think 1.3.6 should come before 1.3.5, since 1.3.6 seemed to provide background information that was helpful in understanding 1.3.5 (Identify Purpose in general, before more specifically Identifying input purpose).
Issues related to SC here