WCAG2ICT Task Force Decisions

WCAG2ICT Task Force decisions on this page are recorded as indicated in the AG WG Decision Policy.

2024

• Day Month: Decision description (link to resolution in meeting minutes or CfC email)
• 5 September: Answer Issue 473 as proposed.
• 5 September: Incorporate the content for 4.1.1 Parsing into the section SC Problematic for Closed Functionality using Option 4, as-is.
• 5 September: Incorporate the changes to the text before the list as proposed and edited in Option 4 (text above) into the Guidance in this Document section.
• 5 September: Update the document listing in Guidance in this document section using Option 3, as-is.
• 5 September: Incorporate Option 2 changes for 1.4.10 Reflow into the SC Problematic for Close Functionality section.
• 5 September: Incorporate the proposed changes in Option 2 into 1.4.10 Reflow general guidance as proposed in the Google doc.
• 5 September: Answer Issue 394 using Option 2, edited to include the PR link.
• 5 September: Answer Issue 464 as proposed.
• 5 September: Answer Issue 466, as edited in the Google doc.
• 29 August: Incorporate the changes proposed in Option 2 into the definition of 'large scale', as proposed in survey questions 8 and 9.
• 29 August: Remove "Underlying" from the definition of "keyboard interface" and SC 2.1.1 Note 1, as proposed.
• 29 August: Incorporate the changes in Option 3 into Note 1 in the definition of 'keyboard interface', as-shown above.
• 29 August: Incorporate Option 4 changes into SC 2.1.1, as posted in the minutes above, as-is.
• 29 August: Answer Issue 465, as edited in the meeting and posted above in the minutes.
• 29 August: Incorporate the changes in Option 5 into SC 3.3.8 Accessible Authentication, as-is (also posted above in the minutes).
• 29 August: Incorporate Proposal 2 (new examples) as originally proposed in Option 2 into the definition of 'closed functionality'.
• 29 August: Incorporate the new sentence regarding developers and change "should" to "could", but not include "POUR" phrasing, as shown above in the minutes to the Background and Guidance sections.
• 29 August: Answer Issue 463 using Option 2, as-is. (and as also posted above in the minutes).
• 22 August: Merge in the changes to Note 1 of "virtual keyboard" - adjustments to the examples, as-is.
• 22 August: Incorporate the alternative edit version (above) of the proposed Note to SC 2.4.2 Page Titled, as-is.
• 22 August: Answer Issue 437 as proposed above, making sure to substitute in the quoted note we added.
• 22 August: Incorporate the changes from Option 2, as edited in the Google doc into the Guidance section and the change of "should" to "could" in the Background section.
• 22 August: No change to 2.5.1, 2.5.2 and 2.5.7 as a result of Issue 465.
• 15 August: Move the example out of the note in SC 2.5.2 as demonstrated by Option 2 in PR 454.
• 15 August: Update the definition of “user style sheets,” with the modifications as shown in Option 3 in the google doc (copied above in the minutes).
• 15 August: Update the Privacy Considerations using Proposal 2 and Proposal 3 as-is.
• 15 August: Answer issue 446 as proposed in the Google doc, substituting the agreed text changes into the answer where noted.
• 15 August: Issue 397: Make no changes to the note on "virtual keyboard" definition
• 15 August: Answer the issue stating the "virtual keyboard" definition's Note will not be changed and that we tried several iterations to attempt to reword. Provide some examples of what we tried in the answer.
• 8 August: Incorporate the changes to ‘platform software’ notes in 2.5.1, 2.5.2 and 2.5.7 using option 2, as-is.
• 8 August: Incorporate the bullet for 3.2.6 Consistent Help into the SC problematic for closed functionality, as proposed.
• 18 July: Incorporate PR 442 as-is to remove “on”.
• 11 July: Regarding handling of the following open issues
  • Answer Issue 395 as proposed in the comment linked above.
  • Remove the note on "satisfies a success criterion" per issue 416.
  • Issue 418: Use proposal 1c above to replace the note in the definition of "set of web pages".
  • Issue 423: Remove guidance on the definition of "perimeter" and add that term to the section listing Level AAA terms.
• 14 June: Regarding Issue 77: Incorporate Option 3 (the edited version of the COGA proposed content) into the Guidance in this Document, as-is.
• 14 June: Regarding Issue 374:
  • Remove the note we added to 2.4.11 Focus Not Obscured from PR #378.
  • Answer Issue 374 with the text posted above in the minutes.
• 13 June: Regarding Issue #377:
  • Incorporate Option 3 for Note 5 into the general guidance section for 1.4.10 Reflow, as-is.
  • Incorporate Option 5 for Note 7 into the general guidance section for 1.4.10 Reflow, as-is.
• 13 June: Use option 5, as-is in the Google doc for the definition of "platform software"
• 13 June: Incorporate Option 2, as-is for the SC Problematic for Closed - 2.1.1 Keyboard (as posted above in IRC)
• 6 June: Regarding updated proposals for content changes we surveyed this week (in the survey Due 5 June)
  • Do not change the definition of “closed functionality”; leave as it is in the current editor’s draft.
  • Incorporate proposal 5 for 1.4.10 Reflow into the SC Problematic for Closed Functionality section, as-is
• 30 May: Regarding proposed content changes for the editor's draft which we surveyed (see survey results):
  • From Question 2 - Update “closed functionality” examples using Option 3 from the survey, as is.
  • From Question 3 - Move “closed functionality” cross-linking, using Option 2 from the survey, as-is
  • From Question 4 - Update Note 8 of 1.4.10 Reflow using Option 2 from the survey, as-is.
  • From Question 5 - Update general guidance for 2.1.1 Keyboard and add the definition of “virtual keyboard” using Option 4 from the survey, as-is.
  • From Question 6 - Update introductory content in SC Problematic for Closed Functionality and the Comments on Closed Functionality, using Option 3 from the survey, as-is
  • From Question 7 - Update the bullet for 1.3.4 Orientation in the SC Problematic for Closed Functionality using Option 5 from the survey, as-is.
  • From Question 13 - Update the general guidance for 2.4.11 Focus Not Obscured (Minimum) using Option 3 from the survey, as-is.
  • From Question 12 - Update the general guidance for 3.3.8 Accessible Authentication (Minimum) using Option 7 from the Google doc, as-is.
  • From Question 11 - Update the SC Problematic for closed – 3.3.1 Error Identification using Option 7 from the Google doc, as-is.
  • From Question 10 - Update SC Problematic for Closed Functionality - 2.4.2 Page Titled using Option 3 from the survey, as-is.
• 16 May: Approve the WCAG2ICT Document, once updated, to go to the AG WG to approve for publication. NOTE: This was only captured in the minutes as a draft resolution, but only had +1 votes. Official resolution, with its corresponding link, was missed by the TF facilitator in the minutes. The draft resolution and vote can be seen in the minutes right after the resolution on Issue 4 Point 6.
• 16 May: Regarding proposed content changes for the editor's draft:
  • Accept all of the proposed editor’s notes, as-is.
  • Remove Note 1 from 1.4.4 Resize Text.
  • Accept changes to 1.4.4 Resize Text Note 2, as-is.
  • Add new note from Proposal C, edited to use "text" instead of "content" to 1.4.4 Resize Text
  • Incorporate Option 2, as edited (replacing two-directional with two-dimensional) for 1.4.10 Reflow into SC Problematic for Closed Functionality
  • Incorporate changes to 4.1.1 Parsing with the following edits: Add missing period on first bullet of note 4, changing phrasing in Note 3 to "and would be reported".
  • Do not add the proposed new note to 2.4.11.
  • Do not add newly proposed note to SC 3.3.8 Accessible Authentication.
  • Incorporate the proposed modifications to the 2nd sentence of Bullet 4 as-is into the Comments on Conformance section. Do not incorporate the additional sentence.
  • Accept change to 2.4.2 Page Titled as proposed in PR 352, as-is.
• 16 May: Regarding responses to public comments:
  • Respond to issue 257 with reviewed response with minor edit proposed by Mike.
  • Respond to issue 221 as proposed, with the new text we approved today for the SC Problematic content for 1.4.10 Reflow substituted in.
  • Answer point 6 in Issue 4 with proposed response, as-is.
• 9 May: Regarding Issue 4 - https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/issues/4 responses to various points made in the issue:
  • Use option 3, as edited in the Google doc with the “Addition to proposals” option 2B (in IRC above) as the response to Point 3 in Issue 4.
  • Use Option 1 as the response to points 4 & 5 in the issue, as-is.
• 9 May: Accept the proposed edits to the Status of This Document in PR 344, as-is.
• 9 May: Respond to Issue 226 using the proposed Option 2, with Bruce's and Olivia's edits shown in the Google doc.
• 2 May: Regarding issue 145 - Add info/content on the WCAG exemptions in regulatory work:
  • Incorporate proposal 3C in IRC above into the general guidance for the 5 SC that pertain to “sets of documents/software programs” with the editorial change.
  • Incorporate the updated Proposal 3 (above in IRC), into the Guidance in this Document section.
  • Update the SC Problematic for closed functionality section using Proposal 4 with edits noted for consistency.
• 25 April: Do not make extensive changes to WCAG2ICT Draft due to DoJ's new Rule. This will be handled in other resources outside of the Note.
• 18 April: Regarding Issue 145: Leave the WCAG2ICT guidance on "conforming alternate version" as it is in the current editor's draft ("does not use the term...")
• 11 April: Incorporate Option 3A with edits of "40" to "256" and removing last paragraph to replace notes 6 and 7 of 1.4.10 Reflow.
• 11 April: Regarding SC Problematic for Closed: 2.4.4 Link Purpose (In Context) - Incorporate Option 3, that has the small edit to add “being” as shown in the meeting minutes.
• 11 April: Regarding SC Problematic for Closed: 1.4.5 Images of Text - Incorporate Option 12 as shown in the meeting minutes.
• 4 April: Incorporate option 5 for 2.1.1 Keyboard into the SC Problematic for Closed Functionality section, as-is.
• 4 April: Incorporate option 4 for 4.1.3 Status Messages into the SC Problematic for Closed Functionality section, as-is
• 4 April: Incorporate adjustments to 4.1.1 Parsing general guidance using option 2 and editing to expand DOM
• 14 March: Finalize the answer to issue 216, as-is.
• 14 March: SC Problematic for closed functionality section - per SC guidance:
  • Keep text as-is (Option 0) for Name, Role, Value in the SC Problematic for Closed Functionality section, and add Option 5's additional text to the introductory paragraph of the section.
  • Use text in Option 3 (Gregg's edit above) for Info and Relationships in the SC Problematic for Closed Functionality section, and add Option 1's additional text to the introductory paragraph of the section.
• 7 March: Incorporate the proposal for SC 2.1.2 No Keyboard Trap (linked above from the comment in issue 272) into the SC Problematic for Closed Functionality section, as-is. NOTE: The documented resolution from the meeting erroneously said only the "SC Problematic for Closed Functionality" content, but in the survey we also clearly reviewed an additional note for the "Applying..." section. Both were accepted unanimously in the survey (See the survey results for 2.1.2 No Keyboard Trap).
• 7 March: Incorporate the proposal for SC 2.1.4 Character Key Shortcuts into the SC Problematic for Closed Functionality section, as edited by Mitch (above).
• 7 March: Incorporate the proposal for SC 2.4.7 Focus Visible into the SC Problematic for Closed Functionality section, as edited above.
• 29 February: We will remove including the Understanding Intent sections starting with the next public draft.
• Regarding changes to SC 1.4.12 Text Spacing
  • Change draft to have no word substitutions on the SC 1.4.12 Text Spacing.
  • Include Note 3, for SC 1.4.12 Text Spacing as edited in the minutes above.
  • Update the SC Problematic for Closed for SC 1.4.12 Text Spacing, as edited by Bruce above.
• 22 February: Decisions on SC 4.1.3 Status Messages
  • Incorporate the word substitution (which is really no word substitution) as as shown in Option 1 as-is for SC 4.1.3.
  • Incorporate Notes 1 and 2 for SC 4.1.3 as proposed in the survey.
  • Incorporate into the proposed SC problematic for closed functionality, the proposed content for SC 3.3.8 (was actually 4.1.3 per the topic name) as-is.
• 22 February: Decisions on responses to public comments
  • Finalize the proposed answer to Issue 308 with the changes proposed by Mitch (removing the two paragraphs polled above) and adding a link in the first sentence to the key term "software".
  • Accept the changes and issue answer for Issue 77 as proposed in the survey.
• 15 February: Decisions on remaining content for SC 3.3.8 Accessible Authentication (Minimum)
  • Incorporate Note 3 by adding “If the non-web software is an application” to the beginning of the sentence.
  • Incorporate Note 4 as proposed in the survey.
  • Incorporate part 1 of the SC problematic for closed functionality for SC 3.3.8 as proposed in Option 2 in the Google doc
  • Incorporate part 2 of the SC problematic for closed functionality for SC 3.3.8 as edited in the text shown in IRC (Phil's entry).
• 8 February: Incorporate Option (proposal) 1 from pull request 254 to finish the update to Comments on Closed Functionality.
• 8 February: Regarding responses to public comments:
  • Finalize the proposed answer to Issue 230 with the edit to add “Conclusion:” to the last paragraph. NOTE: Resolution has the incorrect issue number 225 when we were actually discussing/working on 230, as shown in the topic in the meeting minutes.
  • Finalize the proposed answer to Issue 227 as stated above.
  • Finalize the proposed answer to Issue 225 as proposed, making the edits Fernanda and Mitch suggest in the survey.
• 1 February: Incorporate PRs 306 and 307 for Comments on Closed Functionality and “closed products” definition updates.
• 1 February decisions regarding 2.5.8 Target Size (Minimum):
  • Incorporate the above note proposed for 2.5.8 Target Size (Minimum) as-is to that SC and to 1.4.10 Reflow and "perimeter" definition.
  • Incorporate Notes 1 and 2 as edited above into the SC problematic for Closed functionality for SC 2.5.8 Target Size (Minimum).
• 1 February: Incorporate guidance for SC 3.3.8 Accessible Authentication up to the notes (per question 4 in the survey) as-is.
• 18 January: Don't add a note to 2.1.4 Character Key Shortcuts general guidance.
• 11 January: Accept the proposed answers to public comments in Issues 5, 6, 77, 229, 261, and 268 as proposed in the survey, without changes.
• 11 January: Decisions regarding 3.2.6 Consistent Help:
  • Incorporate the proposal for Applying SC 3.2.6 Consistent Help to Non-Web Documents and Software section as-is.
  • Incorporate proposed Note 3 for SC 3.2.6 Consistent Help as-is.
• 11 January: Incorporate bullets for SC 3.2.3 and 3.2.4 into the SC Problematic for Closed Functionality, as-is.
• 4 January the following decisions on bullets for the SC Problematic for Closed Functionality section. Proposed text for the options is contained in the meeting minutes.
  • Incorporate 2.5.2 Pointer Cancellation option 2, as above as-is, into the SC problematic for Closed Functionality section
  • Incorporate 3.1.1 Language of Page bullet using Option 3 as-is into the SC problematic for closed functionality section.
  • Incorporate 3.1.2 Language of Parts bullet using Option 3 as-is into the SC problematic for closed functionality section.
  • Adjustment to 3.1.1 (above) approved for consistency - update the text for 3.1.1 bullet to replace the phrase "this criterion does not apply" to "the intent of this success criterion would be met".

2023

• 14 December: Accept all 4 of the term definitions (encloses, focus indicator, minimum bounding box, and perimeter) proposed in the survey as-is.

• 7 December: While discussing 3.2.6 Consistent Help: Do not add a bullet for 3.2.6 Consistent Help to the SC Problematic for Closed Functionality section.

• 16 November: Incorporate update to SC 4.1.1 changing first “should” to “is to” and second “should no longer” to “would no longer”.

• 16 November: Add term “cognitive function test”, changing “Web sites” to “Web sites, non-web documents, and software”.

• 9 November: Approved proposed updates to add SC 2.5.7 Dragging Movements to the editor's draft:

  • Add 2.5.7 Dragging Movements SC guidance proposal 2 from the survey into the editor’s draft, as-is.
  • Do not add a bullet for 2.5.7 Dragging Movements to the SC Problematic for Closed Functionality section.
  • Add “dragging movements” term to the Glossary Items that Apply to All Technologies section.

• 9 November: Approved proposed updates to add SC 2.4.11 Focus Not Obscured (Minimum) to the editor's draft

  • Incorporate proposal for 2.4.11 Focus Not Obscured (Minimum), as-is.
  • Do not add a bullet for 2.4.11 Focus Not Obscured (Minimum) to the SC Problematic for Closed Functionality section.

• 9 November: So that we can handle WCAG 2.0 and 2.1 updates to 4.1.1 Parsing in the document: Publish one document to cover all three WCAG 2 versions and rename document to be for WCAG 2

• 9 November: To fix issue #240 - Rename section to Comments on Closed Functionality

• 2 November: Approved WCAG2ICT content updates:

  • Incorporate changes to 4.1.1 Parsing guidance as proposed, using Option 2 in the survey, as-is.
  • Remove bullet for 4.1.1 Parsing from the SC Problematic for Closed Functionality section

• 2 November: Regarding public comment on Issue 4 - Respond to point 1 with option 2, as edited above with dates fixed.

• 26 October: Approved WCAG2ICT Content updates:

  • Incorporate proposed changes for “satisfies a success criterion” as-is.
  • Incorporate proposed changes for definition of “conformance” as-is.
  • Incorporate proposed changes for definition of “structure”, with edit to remove “user”.
  • Incorporate the proposed change for “not applicable” into the Comments on Conformance section, as edited in PR 247.

• 26 October: Regarding FPWD public comments:

  • Finalize response to Issue 226 with the edits proposed in the survey and adding a reference to the update to the Comments on Conformance section.

• 19 October: Regarding FPWD public comments:

  • Finalize response to issue #231, with edits to improve first sentence repetitive "modification supported" and reiterate why "user" should not be added.
  • Finalize response to issue 224, with the addition of a reference to a new issue we open committing to re-evaluate inclusion of intent.

• 19 October: Regarding SC Problematic for closed functionality section

  • Incorporate “menu-driven interface” definition, removing “easy-to-use” and "simple".
  • Incorporate closed functionality bullet for 2.4.5 Multiple Ways, splitting first sentence as shown Olivia's survey comments.

• 12 October: Regarding public comments Send response for issue 228 as-is.

• 12 October: Regarding changing the section names:

  • Change Guideline and principle headings as posted above.
  • Update the headings for the SC guidance using option 1 above.
  • update term definitions to be consistent such as "Applying “accessibility supported” to Non-Web Documents and Software"

• 12 October: Regarding SC problematic for closed functionality:

  • Incorporate 2.1.1 Keyboard option 3 with edits, as above.
  • Accept Option 2 for 2.4.2 Page Titled, as-is.

• 5 October: For Issue 232 - open a WCAG issue on the verbiage "information", adjust the response per Chuck's suggestion, and add reference to the WCAG issue to the response.

• 5 October: Send response with the addition in IRC above labeled "Add" and send.

• 5 October: No bullet needed for 3.3.7 Redundant Entry in the SC Problematic for Closed Functionality section.

• 5 October: Incorporate 3.3.7 Redundant Entry, using the alternate proposal in the survey, as-is (no word substitution).

• 21 September: Additional email in response to Mary Jo’s email on 7 Sept. need no further response.

• 21 September: Update 2.4.1 Bypass Blocks bullet using Option 2 as shown in the minutes.

• 7 September: Send response on kiosk comment received on 15 August, as updated with the additional comment.

• 7 September: Update 1.4.13 Content on Hover or Focus - remove the bullet.

• 31 August: Incorporate option 5 above, as is for 1.3.2 Meaningful Sequence. Editors will edit overall Closed functionality section for consistency later and bring those back to the group.

• 31 August:Update 1.4.12 Text spacing with option 3 above as-is.

• 24 August: FPWD Comment handling Send response on kiosk comment received on 15 August, as proposed in issue 215.

• 17 August: Closed functionality bullets - Update 1.4.10 Reflow bullet using Option 1, with minor edit as shown in the minutes above.

• 10 August: The following decisions were made regarding proposed content updates to the SC problematic for Closed Functionality section. The exact text in the options are documented in the meeting minutes:

  • Update 1.3.5 bullet as edited above
  • Update 1.4.2 Audio Control bullet using Option 2 above
  • Update 1.4.3 and 1.4.11 bullets using text posted above

• 3 August: The following decisions were made regarding proposed content updates to the SC problematic for Closed Functionality section. The exact text in the options are documented in the meeting minutes:

  • Incorporate the key term “closed functionality” as proposed.
  • Use the drafted Introductory sentence, with the edits in Option 2, shown above.
  • Use the drafted Introductory sentence Option 2 as-is, shown above.
  • Incorporate 1.2.1 and 1.2.3 using option 3 above, as-is
  • Update 1.3.4 Orientation bullet using Option 3 above

• 27 July: WCAG2ICT TF supports the publishing of the FPWD

• 27 July: Incorporate the proposed updates for the above list of SC as-is. (only item in list was 2.4.5 Motion Actuation)

• 20 July: Incorporate the introductory Text / CLI / Terminal Emulator content into the editor’s draft, with the edits and polls results above indicate.

• 20 July: Incorporate the Background on Text / CLI / Terminal Emulators updates as-is into the editor’s draft, and capture proposed edits in Mitch’s GitHub content for a later update.

• 13 July: The following decisions were made:

  • For 1.4.10 Reflow - Incorporate Note 3 into the editor’s draft, as noted above in the minutes. and Incorporate Note 4 option 3 into the editor’s draft, as shown above.
  • Incorporate “style property” draft into the editor’s draft, with the edits, as shown in the PR linked above.
  • For "set of Web pages" the survey indicated unanimous approval of draft updates to "set of documents (non-web)" and "set of software programs" as-is. The TF reached a resolution for the "set of Web pages" guidance to Incorporate Option 3, as is into the editor’s draft.
  • Add 1.4.10 Reflow bullet to the closed functionality section, as edited.

• 6 July: The following decisions were made regarding notes reviewed in the 1.4.10 Reflow survey. The exact verbiage is noted in the minutes.

  • Do not include additional examples for non-web documentation.
  • Incorporate combined proposal for Non-web documents Note 2, copied above.
  • Add in Software Note 1 as-is, with an editor's note asking whether the guidance for software is good.
  • For software note 2, use option 3 (but save option 1 in case public review or AG WG prefer less fuzzy language) - this is regarding the first sentence of the note.
  • Remove Note 2 bullet 1 and incorporate text in Option 3 above, as-is.
  • Incorporate edited version of Note 2's 3rd bullet.
  • Incorporate Note 3 using option 2 as-is. However, this note has "should" so needs an edit.

• 29 June: Replace existing non-web document note for 2.4.8 Target Size (Minimum) with the above version. Exact verbiage is noted in the meeting minutes.

• 29 June: Regarding survey on CSS Pixel definition (NOTE: Exact verbiage to incorporate is documented in the meeting minutes)

  • Incorporate Note 2 with edits and the explanation of where 2688 came from, as shown above.
  • Incorporate Note 3 with Loïc's changes to remove normative language.

• 22 June: Regarding survey on CSS Pixel definition

  • Incorporate Note 1, as above, provided the examples given do approximate the CSS pixel for the given platforms. Text of the proposal:

  Note 1: Non-web software and its accompanying platform software do not use CSS pixel measurements. Therefore, platform-defined density-independent pixel measurements which approximate the CSS reference pixel should be used. Examples of platform-defined density-independent pixel measurements include: points (pt) in iOS and macOS, density-independent pixels (dp) for Android, and effective pixels (epx) for Windows.

  • Do not include note 2.

• 8 June: Regarding changes to proposed text for 2.5.8 Target Size (minimum)

  • Modify the Equivalent bullet, replacing "on the same page" with "in the same non-web document or software" so it reads, "Equivalent: The function can be achieved through a different control [in the same non-web document or software] that meets this criterion."
  • Modify "target" definition, replacing "page" with "content"
  • Remove the non-web software example with the size calculation
  • Incorporate 2.5.8 Target Size (Minimum) with the changes we agreed on today. Software notes 1 and 2 are on the definition of css pixels, remove the example, and modify definition note for target as discussed today.

• 27 April: Incorporate 2.5.1 into the draft with Proposal 2 for non-web documents and Proposal 2 for non-web software.

• 27 April: Include the WCAG SC Understanding Intent sections into document

• 6 April: Incorporate 1.4.11 Non-text Contrast into the editor’s draft as proposed with the closed functionality content as surveyed without changes.

• 30 March: Incorporate both 1.4.12 Non-text Contrast with the changes indicated in the linked comment above and Mary Jo’s editorial change.

• 30 March: Merge 2.5.2 Pointer Cancellation into the editor’s draft with the changes Mitchell proposed and Bruce’s update to Note 1 (text above).

• 30 March: Merge Mary Jo’s proposal with Fernanda’s proposed change and Mitchell’s edits for 4.1.3 Status Messages into the editor’s draft.

• 2 March: Incorporate both the Key Terms and Level AAA-only definitions sections with the note and example changes as edited in the meeting.

• 2 March: Merge the proposal for 1.4.13 into the editor’s draft with the edited text in Mary Jo’s comment on the issue (linked above)

• 23 February: Incorporate SC 2.5.3 with the changes noted in the minutes: Change to note in the "name" and addition of closed functionality verbiage.

• 16 February: Merge the draft Abstract into the Editor’s draft with the last sentence removed.

• 16 February: Incorporate the Comparison section as-is.

• 16 February: use option 2 above and incorporate introduction sections into the draft. Option 2 was: Leave draft as proposed in the pull request and add an editor's note to the Guidance in this Document section; it will be checked again for accuracy after all SCs have been analyzed.

• 9 February: Incorporate SC 2.5.4 into the editor’s draft as-is

• 2 February: Incorporate SC 2.1.4 into the document with the polled changes above. See the 2 Feb minutes for the documentation of polled changes.

• 26 January 2023: Incorporate the background section with the edits noted in the survey by Mary Jo and Olivia.

2022

• 1 December: Incorporate the Guidelines changes as-is and open an issue on the WCAG understanding to address Gregg’s comment.
• 10 November: Add a Background section to the WCAG2ICT document to explain how and where the 2013 WCAG2ICT Note has been relied upon.
• 10 November: Add a “Comparison to the 2013 WCAG2ICT Note“ section to the WCAG2ICT Note.
• 10 November: Do not add a Change log section to the WCAG2ICT Note.
• 27 October: Change to WCAG 2.0 to WCAG 2.2 throughout (the document)
• 6 October: Accept Patent policy section
• 6 October: The scope of ICT covered will remain in the note and not in the work statement.
• 6 October: We will keep AAA in scope, keep it separate with WCAG's strong warning, and address later after A and AA are addressed.
• 6 October: Agree to Scope section with any amendments in pull request 2682
• 29 September: Accept amended approach section per PR 2682 that handled survey comments on the Approach section
• 29 September: Accept participation section as there were no survey comments for the participation section.