Re: SC Level assignment in WCAG 2.0

Agreed.

Cheers,
David MacDonald



*Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*

Tel:  613-806-9005

LinkedIn
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>

twitter.com/davidmacd

GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald>

www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/>



*  Adapting the web to all users*
*            Including those with disabilities*

If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy
<http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html>


On Thu, Feb 28, 2019 at 10:06 AM Bruce Bailey <Bailey@access-board.gov>
wrote:

> Definitely not hard and fast rules for the level assignments, but I was
> surprised how distinct the patterns are after-the-fact with the
> benefit-of-hindsight.
>
> The did-it-require-AT question was not something I thought to capture in
> my analysis.
>
> The impacting the look and feel of the website is very much reflected in
> that table, under the column heading “invisible”.
>
> Of course, the SC that are invisible are also going to be things that tend
> to require AT to get the benefits.
>
>
>
> *From:* David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 28, 2019 6:08 AM
> *To:* Bruce Bailey <Bailey@Access-Board.gov>
> *Cc:* Silver TF <public-silver@w3.org>
> *Subject:* Re: SC Level assignment in WCAG 2.0
>
>
>
> Two additional factors that went into the decision of what level to choose
> were:
>
>
>
> - Did it require AT? The Level A SCs generally didn't require a user to
> purchase Assistive Technology (i.e. magnification)
>
> - Did it impact the look or feel of the website, and cause redesign? Level
> A generally doesn't require a change to the look or feel of the site.
>
>
>
> We've always been careful not to create hard and fast rules about when
> something was Level A or AA and have stuck with "The Success Criteria were
> assigned to one of the three levels of conformance by the working group
> after taking into consideration a wide range of interacting issues."
>
>
>
> Cheers,
> David MacDonald
>
>
>
> *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*
>
> Tel:  613-806-9005
>
> LinkedIn
>
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fin%2Fdavidmacdonald100&data=02%7C01%7CBailey%40access-board.gov%7C8ac19d7d3ea145a31b3f08d69d6d12d5%7Cfc6093f5e55e4f93b2cf26d0822201c9%7C0%7C0%7C636869489154426867&sdata=X%2BUNQn2Q0YVU9DZdsoVAsbyapbIj28ockmK1zizuNsQ%3D&reserved=0>
>
> twitter.com/davidmacd
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fdavidmacd&data=02%7C01%7CBailey%40access-board.gov%7C8ac19d7d3ea145a31b3f08d69d6d12d5%7Cfc6093f5e55e4f93b2cf26d0822201c9%7C0%7C0%7C636869489154426867&sdata=89bzS4nIs8L%2BA%2FD5rsfggYYkA9TPvujdPLaIah6zv1I%3D&reserved=0>
>
> GitHub
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FDavidMacDonald&data=02%7C01%7CBailey%40access-board.gov%7C8ac19d7d3ea145a31b3f08d69d6d12d5%7Cfc6093f5e55e4f93b2cf26d0822201c9%7C0%7C0%7C636869489154436871&sdata=AVk9joJoAnbRywOSHBGp1O7ZoZSZPiiLGUjF1exryTE%3D&reserved=0>
>
> www.Can-Adapt.com
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.can-adapt.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7CBailey%40access-board.gov%7C8ac19d7d3ea145a31b3f08d69d6d12d5%7Cfc6093f5e55e4f93b2cf26d0822201c9%7C0%7C0%7C636869489154446880&sdata=NnT5LYw8Xo6rLYj10rmGy%2BavpBvqohcroHeeDzyWDYA%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
>
> *  Adapting the web to all users*
>
> *            Including those with disabilities*
>
>
>
> If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidmacd.com%2Fdisclaimer.html&data=02%7C01%7CBailey%40access-board.gov%7C8ac19d7d3ea145a31b3f08d69d6d12d5%7Cfc6093f5e55e4f93b2cf26d0822201c9%7C0%7C0%7C636869489154446880&sdata=6koLKJfpjYyOJ9QKmvQxipSopCF6qk56gPwJaWEsShY%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 26, 2019 at 10:59 AM Bruce Bailey <Bailey@access-board.gov>
> wrote:
>
> On the call today it came up that, in the context of litigation, it was
> not clear enough to lawyers how success criteria were assigned to the
> different levels.
>
> The most authoritative explanation is from Understanding Level of
> Conformance:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/conformance.html#uc-levels-head
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2FUNDERSTANDING-WCAG20%2Fconformance.html%23uc-levels-head&data=02%7C01%7CBailey%40access-board.gov%7C8ac19d7d3ea145a31b3f08d69d6d12d5%7Cfc6093f5e55e4f93b2cf26d0822201c9%7C0%7C0%7C636869489154456892&sdata=IbsNa9PyMbsJYX0NkG0p1lGPaQXxHd%2FsZlbIIms60NA%3D&reserved=0>
>
> See the five bullet list following these two sentences:
> The Success Criteria were assigned to one of the three levels of
> conformance by the working group after taking into consideration a wide
> range of interacting issues.  Some of the common factors evaluated when
> setting the level included...
>
> The assignment of levels was the subject of much discussion as the Working
> Group developed 2.1.  That consensus was posted in the wiki, please see:
>
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/WCAG_2.1_Success_Criteria#Initial_Suggestion_for_Priority_Level
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FWAI%2FGL%2Fwiki%2FWCAG_2.1_Success_Criteria%23Initial_Suggestion_for_Priority_Level&data=02%7C01%7CBailey%40access-board.gov%7C8ac19d7d3ea145a31b3f08d69d6d12d5%7Cfc6093f5e55e4f93b2cf26d0822201c9%7C0%7C0%7C636869489154466896&sdata=ecasUu8tZ6yb3s6SN6r9RDeOXYtfqJZu379ukd4Kw%2Bw%3D&reserved=0>
>
> As part of that effort, I did an analysis (that has *not* been fully
> vetted by the working group) of the 2.0 against the five bullet points
> mentioned above.  See the discussion tab of that page:
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Talk:WCAG_2.1_Success_Criteria
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FWAI%2FGL%2Fwiki%2FTalk%3AWCAG_2.1_Success_Criteria&data=02%7C01%7CBailey%40access-board.gov%7C8ac19d7d3ea145a31b3f08d69d6d12d5%7Cfc6093f5e55e4f93b2cf26d0822201c9%7C0%7C0%7C636869489154466896&sdata=kucNOUa2vjYurx4jE9duK1by2kpzP1v9hruZSxVOIIY%3D&reserved=0>
>
> What I found is that:
> WCAG 2.0 Level A SC (generally) are two-out-of-three for easy, essential,
> or invisible -- 21 of 25 Level A SC are characterized this way.
> WCAG 2.0 Level AAA SC (generally) are not possible for all content -- 21
> of 24 Level AAA SC are characterized this way.
> That leaves AA SC (generally) as the remainder.  The more detailed tally
> is at the bottom of that wiki page:
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/WCAG_2.1_Success_Criteria#Observations
> <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FWAI%2FGL%2Fwiki%2FWCAG_2.1_Success_Criteria%23Observations&data=02%7C01%7CBailey%40access-board.gov%7C8ac19d7d3ea145a31b3f08d69d6d12d5%7Cfc6093f5e55e4f93b2cf26d0822201c9%7C0%7C0%7C636869489154476905&sdata=MT30KoG4TUQBZA%2F85xsWqhpS6gqygdc232t2I630Uzo%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>