-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 289
Concern for use of "must" in notes. #4432
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
Comments
While I understand the desire not to have MUST/SHOULD in non-normative prose, as that would introduce new normative requirements by the backdoor, I think in this case this is used as a way to signpost an already existing normative requirement coming from that conformance requirement 5? |
The EN 301 549 is not allowed to have normative words in non-normative statements, and I thought that W3C standards were the same (not sure, but it would make sense). The WCAG2ICT TF discussed today - "would need to" might be sufficiently imperative without saying "must". |
I agree that this is problematic for WCAG2ICT but merely editorial for WCAG 2. Yes, the WCAG 2 citation to the conformance requirements supports the use of "must". WCAG2ICT has comments on conformance but that's different. WCAG2ICT also has a grammar issue in that the word substitution differs between the criterion text and the note. I could not make a simple word substitution for "must" work. How about:
|
Similar to a couple of proposals for this note in the WCAG2ICT issue 680, here's a couple more variations of @bruce-usab's suggestion above with verbiage changes bolded to help with reviewing in the context of this issue. It wouldn't be bolded when incorporated into WCAG.
OR
|
Draft Official Working Group response
So the use of "must" is appropriate in this case; it is not adding a new requirement in a note, but restating an existing requirement. The Working Group does not believe a change to the note is warranted in this case. The WCAG2ICT Task Force is welcome to reword this note in their own TF guidance to provide a similar message without using the word "must". |
Discussed on backlog call 6/6 and TF concurrence not to make a change. We might revisit after WCAG2ICT and EN 301 549. |
In the WCAG2ICT call today, we discussed that use of "must" in a note is problematic.
Suggestion on call is to replace "must" with "would be necessary" or similar.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: