Update proposed changes for closed functionality #254
Conversation
Based on survey results, creating an update to the proposed content.
✅ Deploy Preview for wcag2ict ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration. |
Want the list of examples to match or be a subset of those named in the closed functionality updates.
|
daniel-montalvo marked as non substantive for IPR from ash-nazg. |
|
deniak marked as substantive for IPR from ash-nazg. |
Update the telephony to indicate these are probably more open. Include Mitch's suggested text introducing the technology list.
We are only talking about software in the SC problematic for closed functionality. That's why "software" is used in the last paragraph. So I instead rephrased some and hopefully that matches the intent Shadi had in mind.
Changes to the key term definition for closed functionality as per results for questions 4 & 5 from survey https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-closed-more-to-review/results
…ed functionality From q4 & 5 on survey https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-closed-more-to-review/results
Update closed-functionality.md - modify examples for comments on clos…
Update key-terms.md - changes to closed functionality key term examples
See [survey results](https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/55145/WCAG2ICT-closed-more-to-review/results#xq5) for Bruce's suggestion, which I modified somewhat.
|
A new user left a comment. This user must be approved by a Netlify team owner before comments can be displayed. |
|
@bruce-usab I cannot see your comment on the proposed changes for closed functionality. Could you please send it to the group via email? |
|
Commenting here from today's meeting, with request to Incorporate Option 1 from pull request 254 to finish the update to Comments on Closed Functionality. @maryjom happy to help here. Please let me know what file I should go in to to update. Not sure whether this is on the PR itself or tracked elsewhere. |
Per call today, I am comfortable with Option 1. |
|
@ChrisLoiselle All you need to do is approve the PR. I've already removed the proposal we didn't chose and ensured the document builds. |
SHA: 9f09c2e Reason: push, by maryjom Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Based on survey results, created this PR update to the proposed content.
The subsequent results from survey on updated closed functionality proposal resulted in some additional changes that I have incorporated into this PR. The latest survey from questions 4 on is reviewing the contents in this updated PR.
In addition, the approved changes from pull requests approved by TF in the 1 Feb. meeting have been incorporated into this PR / branch. One decision is left before we can merge this into the editor's draft: whether to use Option 1 or Option 2 in the Comments on Closed Functionality.