W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-comments-wcag20@w3.org > December 2007

Re: Your comments on WCAG 2.0 Public Working Draft of May, 2007

From: Loretta Guarino Reid <lorettaguarino@google.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 15:52:46 -0800
Message-ID: <824e742c0712111552r72f7bc91ye1df47885f3a8ea5@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Geert Freyhoff" <G.Freyhoff@inclusion-europe.org>
Cc: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org

We had considered requiring that the supplemental text be clearly
labeled except that adding pictures and diagrams should be a natural
process and requiring authors to label them as being supplemental
would defeat the objective of making this a common practice to
automatically include this information as a natural, primary part of
the presentation.

Regards,

Loretta Guarino Reid, WCAG WG Co-Chair
Gregg Vanderheiden, WCAG WG Co-Chair
Michael Cooper, WCAG WG Staff Contact

On behalf of the WCAG Working Group

> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Comment 3: Clearly identify supplemental content or alternate version
> Source:
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-comments-wcag20/2007Jun/0303.
> html
> (Issue ID: 2158)
> ----------------------------
> Original Comment:
> ----------------------------
>
> People with cognitive disabilities have difficulties in reading and
> understanding text. This has been recognized in success criterion 3.1.5.
> This also means that they have difficulties identifying on a website
> which of the contents is the supplemental content or alternate version
> that would be accessible for them.
>
> Therefore, supplemental content or an alternate version must be clearly
> identified as being accessible for people with cognitive disabilities
> without requiring them to read the whole text. This can be done for
> example by using the European Easy-to-Read Logo
> (www.inclusion-europe.org/etr) that is already used for this purpose in
> many European countries. A logo comparable to the logo for physical
> access has the advantage to be language independent.
>
> Proposed Change:
> To insert a new success criterion 3.1.5.bis or modify the criterion
> 3.1.5 as follows:
>
> Supplemental content or alternate versions for people with cognitive
> disabilities must be clearly identified by an access symbol and must be
> accessible from the referring page by one click.
>
> Example of success criterion 3.1.5.bis:
>
> Website of the European Commission, DG Employment and Social Affairs at
> http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/fundamental_rights/index_en.htm
>
> ---------------------------------------------
> Response from Working Group:
> ---------------------------------------------
>
> We have added "clearly marked" to SC 3.1.5 so that it reads:
> "When text requires reading ability more advanced than the lower
> secondary education level, clearly marked supplemental content or an
> alternate version is available that does not require reading ability
> more advanced than the lower secondary education level."
>   We have also added an advisory technique:
> "Clearly marking, by use of text or icon, content which has been
> optimized for easy reading (future link)"
>
>  We are not mandating any particular markings since we do not want to
> limit the use of this technique.
>
> -----------------------------------------------
> INCLUSION EUROPE COMMENT:
> -----------------------------------------------
>
> Since simple access is of paramount importance for people with
> intellectual disabilities, Inclusion Europe suggests the following
> wording: "When text requires reading ability more advanced than the
> lower secondary education level, clearly marked and accessible with one
> click supplemental content or alternate version..."
>
Received on Tuesday, 11 December 2007 23:53:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:11:09 UTC