"easily available" not in definition format

[michael-n-cooper]

The definition for the term easily available does not fit into definition format we use from WCAG 2.0, where the first line of term should be a phrase that in principle could drop in place of the term within the SC text. The definition would come out as "one or more of the following are true:" viewed that way, which defers all substance to the subsequent list. I can't fix this one as an editorial change, so filing an issue.

[joshueoconnor]

How many of our SCs referernce or use the term easily available they may be mostly COGA SCs IIRC. @lseeman is this something you have a definition for?

[detlevhfischer]

I find content and wording of the three bullets quite hard to understand.

If I parse, say, the second bullet as "easily available has the option to save or change the setting" that doesnt mit make sense.
I also do not understand the meaning of "easily available can be set one time with as wide a scope as possible" - that doesn't even look grammatical.

The more fundamental issue is that it is rather soft term especially as it is now tied to three different conditions one of which has to apply. If it cannot be defined more succinctly, thi smay indicate a weakness of the term itself in the context of an SC.

[detlevhfischer]

My proposal:
Remove the term "easily" in Success Criterion 2.2.7 Interruptions (Minimum). Instead of "A mechanism is easily available..." the SC text would then simply read:

A mechanism is easily available to postpone and suppress interruptions and changes in content, unless they are initiated by the user or involve an emergency.

We can then also remove the definition.
Rationale: How easy it is to avail yourself of a mechanism is not testable. The current definition does is unclear and does not help to decide / test unambiguously whether somthing is 'easily' available or not.

[awkawk]

No longer in spec so closing