W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-au@w3.org > January to March 2010

Re: AUWG action: re: accessibility supported uses

From: Jan Richards <jan.richards@utoronto.ca>
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 15:55:20 -0500
Message-ID: <4B634B38.8090302@utoronto.ca>
To: w3c-wai-au@w3.org
Hi all,

There was concern at the last meeting (and in the survey about the WCAG 
2.0 wording in the last paragraph. Here is an updated proposal (nothing 
else has changed from 
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2010JanMar/0024.html):

(1) If possible, let's stick with "conforms to WCAG 2.0" with the extra
wording.

(2) Add link in definition "Accessible web content is web content that
conforms to a particular level of WCAG 2.0 (see *Relationship to WCAG
2.0* section).

(3) Rewording "Relationship to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
(WCAG) 2.0" - trying to make it shorter and clearer:

Because WCAG 2.0 is the most recent W3C Recommendation regarding web
content accessibility, ATAG 2.0 frequently refers to WCAG 2.0
conformance in order to set requirements for (1) the accessibility of
web-based authoring tool user interfaces (Part A) and (2) how authors
should be enabled, supported, and guided towards producing accessible
web content (Part B).

Note on "accessibility-supported ways of using technologies":

Part of conformance to WCAG 2.0 is the requirement that "only
accessibility-supported ways of using technologies are relied upon to
satisfy the [WCAG 2.0] success criteria. Any information or
functionality that is provided in a way that is not accessibility
supported is also available in a way that is accessibility supported."
In broad terms, a technology is considered accessibility supported when
(1) the way that the Web content technology is used is supported by
users' assistive technology and (2) the Web content technology has
accessibility-supported user agents that are available to users.

This concept is not easily extended to authoring tools because many
tools can be installed and used in a variety of environments with
differing availabilities for assistive technologies and user agents
(e.g., private intranets versus public websites, monolingual sites
versus multilingual sites, etc.). Therefore:

*For the purposes of ATAG 2.0 conformance, the accessibility-supported
requirement is waived.*

<CHANGED TEXT>

Once an authoring tool has been installed and put into use, it is 
possible to assess the WCAG 2.0 conformance of the web content that the 
tool produces, including whether the WCAG 2.0 accessibility-supported 
requirement is met. However, this WCAG 2.0 conformance assessment would 
be completely independent of the authoring tool's conformance with ATAG 2.0.

</CHANGED TEXT>

Cheers,
Jan


> Hi all,
> 
> (I am cc'ing WAI-CG because of interest expressed there re: coordinating 
> this issue)
> 
> I took this action on the Monday meeting...
> 
> ACTION: JR clarify in the "accessibility supported" piece that the onus
> is on the installer/author
> 
> Updated proposal:
> (original: 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-au/2010JanMar/0011.html)
> 
> (1) If possible, let's stick with "conforms to WCAG 2.0" with the extra 
> wording.
> 
> (2) Add link in definition "Accessible web content is web content that 
> conforms to a particular level of WCAG 2.0 (see *Relationship to WCAG 
> 2.0* section).
> 
> (3) Rewording "Relationship to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
> (WCAG) 2.0" - trying to make it shorter and clearer:
> 
> Because WCAG 2.0 is the most recent W3C Recommendation regarding web 
> content accessibility, ATAG 2.0 frequently refers to WCAG 2.0 
> conformance in order to set requirements for (1) the accessibility of 
> web-based authoring tool user interfaces (Part A) and (2) how authors 
> should be enabled, supported, and guided towards producing accessible 
> web content (Part B).
> 
> Note on "accessibility-supported ways of using technologies":
> 
> Part of conformance to WCAG 2.0 is the requirement that "only
> accessibility-supported ways of using technologies are relied upon to
> satisfy the [WCAG 2.0] success criteria. Any information or 
> functionality that is provided in a way that is not accessibility 
> supported is also available in a way that is accessibility supported." 
> In broad terms, a technology is considered accessibility supported when 
> (1) the way that the Web content technology is used is supported by 
> users' assistive technology and (2) the Web content technology has 
> accessibility-supported user agents that are available to users.
> 
> This concept is not easily extended to authoring tools because many 
> tools can be installed and used in a variety of environments with 
> differing availabilities for assistive technologies and user agents 
> (e.g., private intranets versus public websites, monolingual sites 
> versus multilingual sites, etc.). Therefore:
> 
> *For the purposes of ATAG 2.0 conformance, the accessibility-supported 
> requirement is waived. However, once an authoring tool has been 
> installed and put into use, it would be appropriate for the web content 
> it produces (and the authoring tool user interface of web-based 
> authoring tools) to be assessed for WCAG 2.0 conformance within its 
> environment, including whether the accessibility-supported requirement 
> is met.*

-- 
(Mr) Jan Richards, M.Sc.
jan.richards@utoronto.ca | 416-946-7060

Adaptive Technology Resource Centre (ATRC)
Faculty of Information | University of Toronto
Received on Friday, 29 January 2010 20:55:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 29 January 2010 20:55:43 GMT