Replaces the previous name of the working group in Understanding #4257
Conversation
✅ Deploy Preview for wcag2 ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration. |
|
This one is likely a bit more controversial/not as straightforward, as at the time that WCAG came out, I think the WG was still called that. I think it's possibly safer to leave as is, or to neutralise it by just referring to "the Working Group" to make it applicable to both the old and new names. |
|
A search on "WCAG working group" revealed 36 results over 19 files in the repo -- more than the 6 files changed here. Note that I also confirmed that many occurrences of "Accessibility Guidelines Working Group" exist, so the proposed term is certainly used in the index file and elsewhere. @alastc note that I did discover inconsistency between the use of "AG WG" (53 results in 20 files) and "AGWG" (5 results in 3 files) in usage. I am going to correct the far less prevalent occurrences of AGWG at the same time. |
|
I've determined that other occurrences seem to occur either in old wcag 2 areas not to be updated or in the specification, not relevant non-normative documents, so I will create a separate PR for those the spec changes. IMO this change looks solid. |
|
@momdo I cannot find your PR, so I could not make additional changes in it. @kfranqueiro this ID is not in the group. What's the easiest way to address? |
|
Discussed during Backlog call today and Mike is on the case! |
|
@mbgower |
| @@ -642,7 +642,7 @@ <h3>Level of Assistive Technology Support Needed for "Accessibility Support"</h3 | |||
|
|
|||
| <p>This topic raises the question of how many or which assistive technologies must support | |||
| a Web technology in order for that Web technology to be considered "accessibility | |||
| supported". The WCAG Working group and the W3C do not specify which or how many assistive | |||
| supported". The AG Working Group and the W3C do not specify which or how many assistive | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would we rather expand this to Accessibility Guidelines in all cases? (Other instances have been expanded from WCAG to Accessibility Guidelines in this PR, but this one is still abbreviated as AG. I realize this might be due to the phrasing in @mbgower's comment...)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd be in favour of expanding in all instances, yes
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| supported". The AG Working Group and the W3C do not specify which or how many assistive | |
| supported". The Accessibility Guidelines Working Group and the W3C do not specify which or how many assistive |
|
kfranqueiro marked as non substantive for IPR from ash-nazg. |
I've marked this as non-substantive (which I think is fair for this PR?) in order to pass the check. |
Replace "WCAG" and "Web Content Accessibility Guidelines" with "Accessibility Guidelines".