Editorial pass by Bruce for use of "requires"

comments-on-conformance.md

@@ -1,16 +1,15 @@
-Comments on Conformance
------------------------
+## Comments on Conformance
 
-WCAG2ICT is not a standard, so it is not possible to conform to WCAG2ICT. However, some entities may wish to use the information in WCAG2ICT to help establish standards or regulations regarding accessibility in ICT that are based on WCAG 2. While such standards or regulations will need to address matters of conformance themselves, the following notes may be of assistance to those wishing to draft their own requirements:
+WCAG2ICT is not a standard, so it is not possible to conform to WCAG2ICT.  However, some entities may wish to use the information in WCAG2ICT to establish accessibility policy or requirements based on WCAG 2 for non-web ICT.  Such standards or regulations will need to address matters of conformance.  The following notes will be of utility to those developing policy, practices, or regulation:
 
-1.  The WCAG 2 success criteria and the conformance requirements were designed to work together, such that the language of the success criteria is based on the nature of the conformance requirements. The choice of what level to use for a given criteria (A vs. AA vs. AAA) was further influenced by a number of factors specific to the web domain, as set forth in [Understanding Levels of Conformance](http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Understanding/conformance#levels).
-2.  In the WCAG 2 conformance model, a [success criteria is satisfied](#dfn-satisfies-a-success-criterion) if the item being evaluated does not fail it. If the success criterion is in relation to something that does not exist for the item being evaluated (e.g. a success criterion is about captioning audio and there is no audio), where some might consider the criterion "not applicable", the success criterion is automatically met. This approach is central to the way the success criteria in WCAG are structured and worded.
-3.  WCAG 2 conformance is applied to the item being evaluated (i.e. web page) as a whole, except when a process includes use of several items, in which case all of the items that are needed in order to complete the process must conform.
-4.  In WCAG 2, when conformance relies on accessibility features of the platform (i.e. browser for web content) or on assistive technologies, WCAG 2 requires that there are assistive technologies, etc. that work with the product (web page). That is, conformance with WCAG 2 requires that the approaches used are supported by assistive technologies.
-5.  WCAG 2 allows information on part of a page to not conform if the same information is available elsewhere on the page in conforming fashion. However WCAG 2 identifies 4 success criteria that must be met on all areas of the page because they can interfere with the user's ability to access and use other parts of the page:
+1. The WCAG 2 success criteria, defined terms, and the [conformance requirements](https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/#conformance) were designed to work together, such that the language of the success criteria is based on the nature of the conformance requirements and terminology.  The choice of what level to use for a given criteria (A vs. AA vs. AAA) was further influenced by a number of factors specific to the web domain, as set forth in [Understanding Levels of Conformance](http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Understanding/conformance#levels).
+2. In the WCAG 2 conformance model, a [success criterion is met](https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/#dfn-satisfies) if “the success criterion does not evaluate to ‘false’ when applied to the page”.  If the success criterion is about something that does not exist on the page being evaluated (e.g. a success criterion requiring captioning of audio, but there is no audio) the success criterion is automatically satisfied.  In such cases, some consider the criterion as “not applicable” but regardless the SC is satisfied.  This approach is central to the way the success criteria in WCAG are structured and worded.
+3.  WCAG 2 conformance is evaluated holistically, that is, for full pages and complete processes.
+4.  In WCAG 2, when conformance relies upon accessibility features of the platform (i.e. browser for web content) or on assistive technologies, WCAG 2 requires that there exists browsers and assistive technologies that work with the product (i.e., web page content).  That is, conformance with WCAG 2 requires that the approaches used are [supported by assistive technologies](https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/#dfn-accessibility-supported).
+5.  WCAG 2 allows part of a page to not conform if the same information and functionality is available elsewhere on the page in a conforming manner.  However, WCAG 2 identifies four success criteria that must be met on all areas of the page because they can interfere with the user’s ability to access and use other parts of the page:
     *   [1.4.2 Audio Control](http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/#audio-control);
     *   [2.1.2 No Keyboard Trap](http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/#no-keyboard-trap);
     *   [2.2.2 Pause, Stop, Hide](http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/#pause-stop-hide).
     *   [2.3.1 Three Flashes or Below Threshold](http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/#three-flashes-or-below-threshold);
 
-Also, as noted in the Introduction, it wasn't possible to unambiguously carve up software into discrete pieces, and so the unit of evaluation for non-web software is the whole software program. As with any software testing this can be a very large unit of evaluation, and methods similar to standard software testing might be used.
+As noted in the [Introduction](#introduction), it isn’t possible to unambiguously divide software into discrete pieces.  The unit of evaluation for non-web software is the whole software program.  As with any software testing this can be a very large unit of evaluation, and methods similar to standard software testing may be used.