You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
SLH: Yes, per below, it’s important for others that this type of info be in the header.
WF: We're not clear on the "For developers of evaluation tools and test methodologies" phrase. Is the intent for each page to have the target audience identified in the header? If so we want to discuss this in more details. We briefly talked about "Accessibility testers and test writers", but haven't settled.
SLH: It’s important that “not required to meet WCAG” is front and center for techniques and supplemental guidance and understanding. It is now in the header. e.g.:
"Supplemental Guidance to WCAG 2
Additional ways to improve accessibility (not required to meet WCAG)"
It seems for Rules, the important relevant bit communicates: If you landed here from a search engine, you’re probably not where you want to be. This is for developers of evaluation tools and test methodologies. …
I suggest we open a new issue to work on wording for this.
"For developers of evaluation tools and test methodologies"
-> "For accessibility testers and developers of test tools and methodologies"
I think the current wording is too specific. ACT rules are written for anyone doing testing.
SLH: Would be nice to keep this to one line, not wrapping, on common configurations.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Background from #86 (comment):
From #86 (comment)
SLH: Would be nice to keep this to one line, not wrapping, on common configurations.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: