Comparison of ATAG 1.0 and 2.0

Guideline Requirements:
Overall: Medium change (4 guidelines instead of 7, success criteria have now been added for each checkpoint)

Where to find the ATAG 1.0 requirements
Requirements in ATAG 1.0 Recommendation Location in ATAG 2.0 Draft
Guideline 1. Support accessible authoring practices. Medium change (Combined into...):
GUIDELINE 2: Enable the production of accessible content
1.1 Ensure that the author can produce accessible content in the markup language(s) supported by the tool. [Priority 1]

Major change (Removed):
The WG determined that in the presence of all of the other requirements, there is no longer a need for this requirement - which had been aimed at ensuring that authors with accessibility knowledge could work around shortcomings of tools.
1.2 Ensure that the tool preserves all accessibility information during authoring, transformations, and conversions. [Priority 1] Minor change (Lower priority, combined into...):
2.2 Ensure that the tool preserves all unrecognized markup and accessibility information during transformations and conversions. [Priority 2]
1.3 Ensure that when the tool automatically generates markup it conforms to the W3C's Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0. [Relative Priority] Minor change (Modified wording, new priority scheme):
2.3 Ensure that when the tool automatically generates content it conforms to WCAG. [Web Content Checkpoints Relative to WCAG]
1.4 Ensure that templates provided by the tool conform to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0. [Relative Priority] Minor change (New priority scheme, combined into...):
2.4 Ensure that all pre-authored content for the tool conforms to WCAG. [Web Content Checkpoints Relative to WCAG]
Guideline 2. Generate standard markup. Medium change (Combined into...):
GUIDELINE 2.
2.1 Use the latest versions of W3C Recommendations when they are available and appropriate for a task. [Priority 2] Medium change (Different approach, higher priority):
2.1 Support formats that enable the creation of Web content that conforms to WCAG [Priority 1]
2.2 Ensure that the tool automatically generates valid markup. [Priority 1]
Major change (Removed):
The WG decided that since a validity requirement appears in both WCAG 1.0 and 2.0, it was not required in ATAG.
2.3 If markup produced by the tool does not conform to W3C specifications, inform the author. [Priority 3] Major change (Removed):
The WG decided that this is actually just a special case of Checkpoint 3.2.
Guideline 3. Support the creation of accessible content. Medium change (Combined into...):
GUIDELINE 3: Support the author in the production of accessible content
3.1 Prompt the author to provide equivalent alternative information (e.g., captions, auditory descriptions, and collated text transcripts for video). [Relative Priority]
Major change (New priority scheme, wider scope, combined into...):
3.1 Prompt and assist the author to create content that conforms to WCAG. [Web Content Checkpoints Relative to WCAG]
3.2 Help the author create structured content and separate information from its presentation. [Relative Priority] Minor change (Combined into...):
Checkpoint 3.1.
3.3 Ensure that prepackaged content conforms to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0. [Relative Priority] Minor change (Combined into...):
Checkpoint 2.4.
3.4 Do not automatically generate equivalent alternatives. Do not reuse previously authored alternatives without author confirmation, except when the function is known with certainty. [Priority 1]
Minor change (Modified wording):
3.4 Do not automatically generate equivalent alternatives or reuse previously authored alternatives without author confirmation, except when the function is known with certainty. [Priority 1]
3.5 Provide functionality for managing, editing, and reusing alternative equivalents for multimedia objects. [Priority 3] Minor change (Modified wording):
3.5 Provide functionality for managing, editing, and reusing alternative equivalents. [Priority 3]
Guideline 4. Provide ways of checking and correcting inaccessible content. Medium change (Combined into...):
GUIDELINE 3.
4.1 Check for and inform the author of accessibility problems. [Relative Priority] Minor change (New priority scheme):
3.2 Check for and inform the author of accessibility problems. [Web Content Checkpoints Relative to WCAG]
4.2 Assist authors in correcting accessibility problems. [Relative Priority] Minor change (Modified wording, new priority scheme):
3.3 Assist authors in repairing accessibility problems. [Web Content Checkpoints Relative to WCAG]
4.3 Allow the author to preserve markup not recognized by the tool. [Priority 2] Minor change (Combined into...):
Checkpoint 2.4.
4.4 Provide the author with a summary of the document's accessibility status. [Priority 3] Minor change (Modified wording):
3.6 Provide the author with a summary of accessibility status. [Priority 3]
4.5 Allow the author to transform presentation markup that is misused to convey structure into structural markup, and to transform presentation markup used for style into style sheets. [Priority 3] Major change (Moved to techniques):
For Checkpoint 3.1.
Guideline 5. Integrate accessibility solutions into the overall "look and feel". Medium change (Combined into...):
GUIDELINE 4: Promote and integrate accessibility solutions
5.1 Ensure that functionality related to accessible authoring practices is naturally integrated into the overall look and feel of the tool. [Priority 2]
 Major change (Moved to a note):
The WG decided that this requirement could not be meaningfully measured.
5.2 Ensure that accessible authoring practices supporting Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0 Priority 1 checkpoints are among the most obvious and easily initiated by the author. [Priority 2]

Minor change (Modified wording):
4.1 Ensure that the most accessible option for an authoring task is given priority. [Priority 2]

Guideline 6. Promote accessibility in help and documentation. Medium change (Combined into...):
GUIDELINE 4.
6.1 Document all features that promote the production of accessible content. [Priority 1]
 Minor change (Lower priority):
3.7 Document all features of the tool that promote the production of accessible content. [Priority 2]
6.2 Ensure that creating accessible content is a naturally integrated part of the documentation, including examples. [Priority 2] Minor change (Modified wording):
3.8 Ensure that accessibility is modeled in all documentation and help, including examples. [Priority 3]
6.3 In a dedicated section, document all features of the tool that promote the production of accessible content. [Priority 3] Major change (Moved to techniques):
For Checkpoint 3.7.
Guideline 7. Ensure that the authoring tool is accessible to authors with disabilities. Minor change (Modified wording):
GUIDELINE 1: Make the authoring interface accessible
7.1 Use all applicable operating system and accessibility standards and conventions (Priority 1 for standards and conventions that are essential to accessibility; Priority 2 for those that are important to accessibility; Priority 3 for those that are beneficial to accessibility). Medium change (Modified wording, new priority scheme):
1.1 Ensure that the authoring interface follows applicable software accessibility guidelines. [Authoring Interface Checkpoints Relative to WCAG or Authoring Interface Checkpoints Relative to ISO-TS-16071]
7.2 Allow the author to change the presentation within editing views without affecting the document markup. [Priority 1] Minor change (Modified wording):
1.3 Allow the display preferences of the authoring interface to be changed without affecting the document markup. [Priority 1]
7.3 Allow the author to edit all properties of each element and object in an accessible fashion. [Priority 1] Medium change (Modified wording, new priority scheme):
1.2 Ensure that the authoring interface enables accessible editing of element and object properties. [Authoring Interface Checkpoints Relative to WCAG or Authoring Interface Checkpoints Relative to ISO-TS-16071]
7.4 Ensure that the editing view allows navigation via the structure of the document in an accessible fashion. [Priority 1] Minor change (Lower priority, Combined into...):
1.4 Ensure that the authoring interface enables the author to navigate the structure and perform structure-based edits. [Priority 2]
7.5 Enable editing of the structure of the document in an accessible fashion. [Priority 2] Minor change (Combined into...):
Checkpoint 1.4.
7.6 Allow the author to search within editing views. [Priority 2] Minor change (Modified wording):
1.5 Ensure that the authoring interface allows the author to search within the editing views. [Priority 2]
 

Major change (New requirement):
3.9 Provide a tutorial on the process of accessible authoring. [Priority 3]
  Major change (New requirement):
4.2 Ensure that accessibility prompting, checking, repair functions, and documentation are always clearly available to the author [Priority 2]
  Major change (New requirement):
@@4.3. Ensure that sequential authoring processes integrate accessibility features. [Priority 2]@@
  Major change (New requirement):
4.4 Ensure that accessibility prompting, checking, repair functions and documentation are configurable [Priority 3]

Checkpoint Priorities:
Medium change (Ability to conform with respect to either version of WCAG for Web content and Web-base authoring interfaces; ATAG 2.0 also requires conformance to ISO-TS-16071 for authoring interfaces that are not Web-based )

ATAG 1.0 ATAG 2.0
  • [Priority 1] If the checkpoint is essential to meeting the goals.
  • [Priority 2] If the checkpoint is important to meeting the goals.
  • [Priority 3] If the checkpoint is beneficial to meeting the goals.
  • [Relative Priority] Some checkpoints that refer to generating, authoring, or checking Web content have multiple priorities. The priority depends on the corresponding priority in the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 1.0 [WCAG10].
    • It is priority 1 to satisfy the checkpoint for content features that are a priority 1 requirement in WCAG 1.0.
    • It is priority 2 to satisfy the checkpoint for content features that are a priority 2 requirement in WCAG 1.0.
    • It is priority 3 to satisfy the checkpoint for content features that are a priority 3 requirement in WCAG 1.0.
  • Priority 1:
    • For Guideline 1 checkpoints: If the authoring tool does not satisfy this checkpoint, one or more groups of authors with disabilities will find it impossible to author for the Web.
    • For Guideline 2, 3, 4 checkpoints: The checkpoint is essential for authors using the authoring tool to create Web content that conforms to WCAG.
  • Priority 2:
    • For Guideline 1 checkpoints: If the authoring tool does not satisfy this checkpoint, one or more groups of authors with disabilities will find it difficult to author for the Web.
    • For Guideline 2, 3, 4 checkpoints: The checkpoint is important for authors using the authoring tool to create Web content that conforms to WCAG.
  • Priority 3:
    • For Guideline 1 checkpoints: If the authoring tool does not satisfy this checkpoint, one or more groups of authors with disabilities will find it inefficient to author for the Web.
    • For Guideline 2, 3, 4 checkpoints: The checkpoint is beneficial for authors using the authoring tool to create Web content that conforms to WCAG.
  • Relative Priority Checkpoints (3 types): The importance of these checkpoints depends on the requirements of external documents.
    • Web Content Checkpoints Relative to WCAG: These checkpoints can be met to one of three levels:
    • Level 1:
      WCAG 1.0: The Web content conforms to WCAG 1.0 Level "A". (i.e. all Priority 1 checkpoints are satisfied)
      WCAG 2.0: The Web content conforms to WCAG 2.0 Level "A". (i.e. all level 1 success criteria for all guidelines have been met)
    • Level 2:
      WCAG 1.0: The Web content conforms to WCAG 1.0 Level "Double-A". (i.e. all Priority 1 and Priority 2 checkpoints are satisfied)
      WCAG 2.0: The Web content conforms to "WCAG 2.0 Level AA". (i.e. all level 1 and 2 success criteria for all guidelines have been met)
    • Level 3:
      WCAG 1.0: The Web content conforms to WCAG 1.0 Level "Triple-A". (i.e. all Priority 1, Priority 2, and Priority 3 checkpoints are satisfied)
      WCAG 2.0: The Web content conforms to "WCAG 2.0 Level AAA". (i.e. all level 1, 2, and 3 success criteria for all guidelines have been met)
  • Authoring Interface Checkpoints Relative to WCAG: These checkpoints can be met to one of three levels:
    • Level 1:
      WCAG 1.0: The authoring interface conforms to WCAG 1.0 Level "A". (i.e. all Priority 1 checkpoints are satisfied)
      WCAG 2.0: The authoring interface conforms to "WCAG 2.0 Level A". (i.e. all level 1 success criteria for all guidelines have been met)
    • Level 2:
      WCAG 1.0: The authoring interface conforms to WCAG 1.0 Level "Double-A". (i.e. all Priority 1 and Priority 2 checkpoints are satisfied)
      WCAG 2.0: The authoring interface conforms to "WCAG 2.0 Level AA". (i.e. all level 1 and 2 success criteria for all guidelines have been met)
    • Level 3:
      WCAG 1.0: The authoring interface conforms to WCAG 1.0 Level "Triple-A". (i.e. all Priority 1, Priority 2, and Priority 3 checkpoints are satisfied)
      WCAG 2.0: The authoring interface conforms to "WCAG 2.0 Level AAA". (i.e. all level 1, 2, and 3 success criteria for all guidelines have been met)
  • Authoring Interface Checkpoints Relative to ISO-TS-16071: These checkpoints can be met to one of three levels designated as "application" in part 7.2 of ISO TS 16071:2003:
    • Level 1:
      • The authoring interface meets guidelines designated as "core" in Part 7.2 of ISO TS 16071:2003.
    • Level 2:
      • The authoring interface meets guidelines designated as "core" and "primary" in Part 7.2 of ISO TS 16071:2003.
    • Level 3:
      • The authoring interface meets guidelines designated as "core", "primary", and "secondary" in Part 7.2 of ISO TS 16071:2003

Conformance Levels:
Minor change (Slightly modified wording)

ATAG 1.0 ATAG 2.0
  • Conformance Level "A": all Priority 1 checkpoints (including Relative Priority checkpoints) are satisfied.
  • Conformance Level "Double-A": all Priority 1 and 2 checkpoints (including Relative Priority checkpoints) are satisfied.
  • Conformance Level "Triple-A": all Priority 1, 2, and 3 checkpoints (including Relative Priority checkpoints) are satisfied.
  • No Conformance: Authoring tool has not met all of the requirements of Conformance Level "A".
  • Conformance Level "A": Authoring tool has met all Priority 1 checkpoints and has also met all of the relative checkpoints to at least Level 1.
  • Conformance Level "Double-A": Authoring tool has met all Priority 1 and Priority 2 checkpoints and has also met all of the relative checkpoints to at least Level 2.
  • Conformance Level "Triple-A": Authoring tool has met all Priority 1, Priority 2, and Priority 3 checkpoints and has also met all of the relative checkpoints to Level 3.