Input Purposes for User Interface Components is an appendix, so should be marked as non-normative about wcag HOT 5 OPEN

you beat me there by 5 minutes...was just about to push up a PR 🏃

from wcag.

Well, you took that merge conflict off my hands, so I had a little time to look at something else

from wcag.

As noted in the PR, I have located the original official WG response showing that this was clearly intended to be an appendix.
Given the wording of 5.1, an acceptable solution is also simply to add the word "Appendix" to the heading.

Introductory material, appendices, sections marked as "non-normative", diagrams, examples, and notes are informative (non-normative).

That said, I think it would be good to see if there's anything in a style guide that shows how appendices are supposed to be structured, and make sure we follow that. Some may argue that the sections labelled with letters in our document are the indicators of appendices (again, with no label). @shawna-slh @iadawn are you aware of any guidance on this?

My old copy of Chicago states:

When more than one appendix appear in a book, they should be numbered like chapters (Appendix 1, Appendix 2, etc.) or designated by letters (Appendix A, Appendix B, etc.), and each should be given a title as well.

from wcag.

It has been pointed out that WCAG 2.0 is significantly different than WCAG 2.1 in regard to structure, with each appendix specifically named and grouped under an Appendices section following the (unnumbered) conformance sections.

WCAG 2.0

WCAG 2.1

WCAG 2.1 introduced a right navigation for the outline. This may have contributed to changes in visible structure, but to point out some obvious differences, the glossary was previously (and problematicly) in an appendix BUT also marked normative. In 2.1, the glossary was moved forward (and its enumeration changed from a letter to a number), but while some Acknowledgements and References remained lettered B and C, all references to appendices vanished.

from wcag.

My suggestion from the meeting:

Add the appendix heading about change log, and mark those and appendix a/b/c. (Probably done with the respect based classes rather than in text.)

Leave section 7 as it is (removing transction-amount separately), and it essentially is normative by that marking, removing the ambiguity.

from wcag.