Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

3. ACT Rule Types - Clarify example #230

Closed
annika-FTB opened this issue Jul 24, 2018 · 1 comment
Closed

3. ACT Rule Types - Clarify example #230

annika-FTB opened this issue Jul 24, 2018 · 1 comment
Assignees
@WilcoFiers
Labels
editorial For CR

Comments

@annika-FTB
Copy link

The example "Header cells in HTML tables" states:
"If any one of these rules passes, the table cell can pass the composed rule."

The wording "can pass the rule" is unclear.
If there are any additional situations, in which the rule is not passed although all the atomic rules are passed, then this should be stated explicitly. Otherwise the sentence should be changed to: "If any one of these rules passes, the table cell passes the composed rule."
@annika-FTB annika-FTB changed the title Section 3. ACT Rule Types - Clarify example 3. ACT Rule Types - Clarify example Jul 24, 2018
@WilcoFiers
Copy link
Collaborator

"test result is a pass"

@WilcoFiers WilcoFiers self-assigned this Aug 2, 2018
WilcoFiers added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 21, 2018
@WilcoFiers
Fix rule type example #230
e95e0dc
@WilcoFiers WilcoFiers mentioned this issue Sep 24, 2018
Merged
WilcoFiers added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 24, 2018
@WilcoFiers
Lots of small editorial changes (#273)
f6210f2 
* Remove aspects MUST requirement #264

* Updated aspects based on feedback #257

* Make test cases required for all rules

* Change "local laws" to "laws" #231

* Add a paragraph on accessibility of rules #226

* Rewrote benchmark to non-normative section #236 #239 #163

* Consistency in rule-aggregation #266

* Tweaked accessibility support language #221

* Changed test subject from MUST to MAY #220

* Require rule IDs in atomic rules list #261

* Fix rule type example #230

* Add rule type to the rule structure #232

* Update from #274

* Add "satify" explanation for Rules to SCs. #227

* Example to "satisfy" WCAG SCs #250

* Scrub document to ensure correct use of "should" and "may" #267

* Break up the PR
@nitedog nitedog added For CR and removed For CR labels Mar 29, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@WilcoFiers WilcoFiers

Labels
editorial For CR
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@WilcoFiers @nitedog @annika-FTB