search

w3c / wcag

Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
https://w3c.github.io/wcag/guidelines/22/
Other
1.13k stars 256 forks source link

Understanding Conformance 2.1 only talks about 2.0 #967

Open jake-abma opened 4 years ago

jake-abma commented 4 years ago

https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG21/Understanding/conformance

Understanding Conformance 2.1 only talks about 2.0

WCAG 2.0 is mentioned 11 times, WCAG 2.1 zero times

alastc commented 4 years ago

The conformance model/content hasn't changed since 2.0. It is still applicable, but I take the point it could be confusing.

We could add a note to the effect it hasn't change, or do a search & replace. I'll check with Michael there isn't an impact I don't know about.

alastc commented 4 years ago

Comment from Michael: Better to update the references to 2.1, and put a note that it is the same as 2.0.

jake-abma commented 3 years ago

@alastc wrote:

Comment from Michael: Better to update the references to 2.1, and put a note that it is the same as 2.0.

Still see 2.0 all over, needs to be changed?

patrickhlauke commented 3 years ago

would it perhaps not be easier to just generalise the wording and say "WCAG"? it should be fairly implict to the reader that since they're reading documentation about WCAG 2.0 or WCAG 2.1 at that point, when it says "WCAG" it refers to "the spec that you're currently reading". make it future proof/less update burden/no need for weird "applies to 2.1 and 2.0 and ..."

jake-abma commented 3 years ago

Yeh, agree until WCAG 3.x is released and this is outdated.. :-)

Maybe "WCAG 2 series"? "WCAG 2.x"?

patrickhlauke commented 3 years ago

maybe i'm giving readers too much credit in understanding that what they read in one stable version doesn't apply to the next version. but yes, "2.x" sounds best to me

patrickhlauke commented 2 months ago

@alastc do we still want to tackle this sort of thing for WCAG 2.1, or just leave it and concentrate purely on 2.2 stuff? (I believe we fixed this in 2.2 not so long ago)