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.

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

Update act-rules-format.bs for secondary requirements explanation #542

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Nov 21, 2023

Conversation

kengdoj
Copy link
Collaborator

@kengdoj kengdoj commented Sep 12, 2023

Update secondary requirements explanation to Move secondary requirement texts out of the background #2060

@@ -224,8 +224,7 @@ Rules that can be used to determine if an accessibility requirement is *satisfie

A secondary accessibility requirement is a requirement that is correlated with the rule, but for which the rule is not designed to test. The outcome of the rule impacts the result of the accessibility requirement, but the rule is not intended to test the conformance of that requirement. This correlation often results in some of the rule's test cases not satisfying the secondary accessibility requirement.

When the rule is not designed to test the accessibility requirement, or failed outcomes of the rule still require further testing for the accessibility requirement, the rule <em class="rfc2119">may</em> map the accessibility requirement as Secondary. When an ACT rule maps to a Secondary requirement, it <em class="rfc2119">must</em> include an explanation of why that requirement is Secondary in the Background section of the rule.

When the rule is not designed to test the accessibility requirement, or failed outcomes of the rule still require further testing for the accessibility requirement, the rule <em class="rfc2119">may</em> map the accessibility requirement as Secondary. When an ACT rule maps to a Secondary requirement, it <em class="rfc2119">must</em> include an explanation of why that requirement is Secondary.
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
When the rule is not designed to test the accessibility requirement, or failed outcomes of the rule still require further testing for the accessibility requirement, the rule <em class="rfc2119">may</em> map the accessibility requirement as Secondary. When an ACT rule maps to a Secondary requirement, it <em class="rfc2119">must</em> include an explanation of why that requirement is Secondary.
When the rule is not designed to test the accessibility requirement, or failed outcomes of the rule still require further testing for the accessibility requirement, the rule <em class="rfc2119">may</em> map the accessibility requirement as secondary. When an ACT rule maps to a Secondary requirement, it <em class="rfc2119">must</em> include an explanation of why that requirement is secondary.

@w3cbot
Copy link

w3cbot commented Nov 9, 2023

daniel-montalvo marked as non substantive for IPR from ash-nazg.

@w3cbot
Copy link

w3cbot commented Nov 9, 2023

daniel-montalvo marked as substantive for IPR from ash-nazg.

@WilcoFiers WilcoFiers merged commit 73ef490 into main Nov 21, 2023
3 checks passed
@WilcoFiers WilcoFiers deleted the kengdoj-secreq-explain branch November 21, 2023 14:17
github-actions bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 21, 2023
SHA: 73ef490
Reason: push, by WilcoFiers

Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
github-actions bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 21, 2023
SHA: 73ef490
Reason: push, by WilcoFiers

Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants