Html: "Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0..."

[stevefaulkner]

https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/introduction.html#suggested-reading

Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 [WCAG]

suggest updating to 2.1 https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG/

[domenic]

Thanks! I think we should probably use https://w3c.github.io/wcag/guidelines/ to match our general policy of referring to latest Editor's Drafts. Then we can remove the version number entirely.

[arsalanhub]

Can I work on this issue?

[annevk]

Yes, provided you can sign https://participate.whatwg.org/agreement you should feel free to submit a PR, no need to ask.

[arsalanhub]

@annevk Yes I have signed.
Is there any discussion channel where I need to join for asking the query?

[annevk]

I'm not entirely sure what you mean, but https://whatwg.org/irc is a place where some of us hang out and you could ask questions. You can also ask them here though if there is something that is unclear.

[arsalanhub]

@stevefaulkner I have a query so that I can understand what exactly we have to do. What I understood is that we have to write 2.1 where ever 2.0 written. Am I right?

Screenshot taken from https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/introduction.html#suggested-reading

[annevk]

That and https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/references.html#refsWCAG should reference https://w3c.github.io/wcag/guidelines/.

[arsalanhub]

@annevk Can you help me figure out where this file is located. I am unable to locate the file.

[annevk]

@arsalanhub the file named source contains the source of the HTML Standard.

[OlushesiToheeb]

If I'm guessing right @annevk, what's meant to be done here is changing

• ### Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 [WCAG] in this link https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/introduction.html#suggested-reading to Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 [WCAG] right?

[annevk]

Yes.

[OlushesiToheeb]

@annevk
I saw this Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 three times in the source file and had to change it to 2.1.
is that what's expect to be done?

[annevk]

Yeah, that sounds right. Twice right there and once in the reference section.