Substantive Errata
No substantive errata have been recorded at present.
Editorial Errata
- In the Status of This Document the paragraph beginning "This document has been reviewed by W3C Members..." appears twice. The first instance of this paragraph should be removed.
- In the Introduction, several (but not all) references to "WCAG 2.0" should be "WCAG 2.1".
- In the 0.5.2 Numbering in WCAG 2.1, the words "critera" and "ccriteria" should be "criteria".
- In 1.4.10 Reflow, the first note had a supernumary "Note" indicator which should be removed.
- In 1.4.13 Content on Hover or Focus, the word "dismissable" should be "dismissible".
- In 4. Robust, the word "by" is repeated but should be present only once.
- In 5.2.2 Full pages, the third note began with "New" which should be removed.
- In 5.3.1 Required Components of a Conformance Claim the editorial note "In WCAG 2.0 this was a dated URI, which may need to be adjusted when this becomes a Rec." should be removed.
- In the definition for keyboard interface, the second (of three) note should be an example of the first note, leaving only two actual notes.
- In the definition for technology, the third note should instead be an example.
- In 7. Input Purposes for User Interface Components, the word "county" should be "country".
- In 1.3.4 Orientation, the note referencing "binary display orientation" has been clarified to read "content is not necessarily restricted to landscape or portrait display orientation".
- In a note in the definition of accessibility supported, references to "Conformance Criterion" were changed to "Conformance Requirement".
- In the definition of relative luminance, the red threshold was updated from 0.03928 to 0.04045.
- In 4.1.1 Parsing one note should be deleted, and two notes added, including: "This Success Criterion should be considered as always satisfied for any content using HTML or XML."