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

Editorial suggestions for consistent links to definitions and capitalization #3038

Merged
merged 73 commits into from
Nov 19, 2024

Conversation

maryjom
Copy link
Contributor

@maryjom maryjom commented Feb 20, 2023

To be consistent with the rest of the document uses.
To be consistent with the rest of the document
For consistency with rest of document.
To be consistent in it's use, art shouldn't be capitalized.
In 2 places "block of text" is used. If we add this option, then new SC can link to the definition.
This is so uses of plural can link to this definition.
"Paused" definition is used in other instances of the word "pause" where it means the same thing, so this shouldn't cause any problems.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This seems appropriate. All uses of "block of text" or "blocks of text" work when considering this as programmatic text.

Copy link
Contributor

@mbgower mbgower left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I've made suggested changes (rejecting the proposed link to the definition) in a few of the files. I'd like those discussed. Otherwise, looks good.

@mbgower mbgower removed their assignment Sep 17, 2024
@mbgower
Copy link
Contributor

mbgower commented Sep 20, 2024

Reviewed and finalized on Sep 20 TF call. Returned to the Errata for CFC column.

reverted to address a -1 on the CFC
@gundulaniemann
Copy link
Contributor

Concering definition of 'block of text':
Well, in some contexts one sentence can cover a whole book page. It is typical for German literature written around 100-150 years ago, for example.
So should we stick the the rather grammatical concept of 'one sentence'?

@bruce-usab
Copy link
Contributor

Discussed on TF call 11/8.

Concerning definition of 'block of text'

@gundulaniemann, I think your example reinforces the change Mike made to not linking to the defined term in the one instance.

So should we stick the rather grammatical concept of 'one sentence'?

Please raise this as a separate issue. Of course, you are well of the reluctance to touch normative text! :-)

@kfranqueiro
Copy link
Contributor

Note: While syncing this PR against main, the change to single-pointer was effectively obsoleted by #4070. Whereas this PR had expanded "an input" to "a pointer input" with "pointer input" linking to its definition, #4070 replaced that phrase with "an input modality".

@kfranqueiro kfranqueiro merged commit 1b2d567 into main Nov 19, 2024
5 checks passed
@kfranqueiro kfranqueiro deleted the mjm-wcag-editorial-suggestions branch November 19, 2024 18:18
@alastc alastc added the ErratumRaised Potential erratum for a Recommendation label Dec 16, 2024
kfranqueiro pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 18, 2024
…ization (#3038)

Co-authored-by: Francis Storr <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Kenneth G. Franqueiro <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Mike Gower <[email protected]>
(cherry picked from commit 1b2d567)
kfranqueiro pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 18, 2024
…ization (#3038)

Co-authored-by: Francis Storr <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Kenneth G. Franqueiro <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Mike Gower <[email protected]>
(cherry picked from commit 1b2d567)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Editorial ErratumRaised Potential erratum for a Recommendation Normative
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.