W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-eo@w3.org > July to September 2013

The Techniques Revise

From: Wayne Dick <wayneedick@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Aug 2013 16:02:49 -0400
Message-ID: <CAJeQ8SBHBsDxy-yibesavhu9je8hk8JFCS6F_JDioWoBe1p09A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>, "EOWG (E-mail)" <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
The new techniques document is deeply flawed, and reduces access for
people with disabilities. My primary trouble is what I consider to be
an industry orientation of WCAG WG.

Slowly but surely, the WCAG WG is taking back necessary accessibility
needs.  Their lack of support of 200% enlargement with effective word
wrapping is just one of many.  Let me be clear, I know that zoom will
not enable word wrapping.  However, when browsers enable text-only
enlargement of text, WCAG WG does not consider lack of support for
word wrapping to be a failure.  What is that?  Word wrapping is
necessary for effective reading. If the browser supports word wrapping
the content should as well.

The stance that accessibility need not be supported by techniques will
seriously harm people with disabilities.  The problem is that vendors
lie about accessibility when they sell software to large institutions.
 The only protection for school districts, universities and other
large entities is reliance on formally written guidelines with
up-to-date implementation techniques.  I would advise any institution
to never buy any product that does not meet current WCAG Techniques.
If a vendor comes up with a new technique they should get it to WCAG
WG right away.  I will work very hard at warning my own CSU System
from taking this advice.

Finally there is G140: Separating information and structure from
presentation to enable different presentations.  WCAG WG has narrowed
the concept of separating content beneath the needs of most people
with print disabilities.  Actually WCAG WG narrowed this level of
accessibility just enough to make it possible for PDF to pass WCAG.
The "Example 2: Tagged PDF" on tagged PDF is an embarrassment for W3C.

If WAI really goes forward with this version of Techniques it will
cost the organization all its hopes for Standards Harmonization.
Governments will have to make their own techniques to protect their
people with disabilities.

Sincerely,

Wayne
Received on Sunday, 4 August 2013 20:03:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:56:01 UTC