W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2007

Re: Cognitive disabilities and WCAG2

From: Jonathan Chetwynd <j.chetwynd@btinternet.com>
Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2007 08:39:15 +0000
Message-Id: <925EED0E-00A7-4F59-B377-C11482F9A996@btinternet.com>
Cc: Sofia Celic <Sofia.Celic@visionaustralia.org>, Jan Dekelver <jan.dekelver@khk.be>, Chuck Hitchcock <chitchcock@cast.org>, Hiroshi Kawamura <hkawa@rehab.go.jp>, Gez Lemon <gez.lemon@gmail.com>, Clayton Lewis <clayton.lewis@colorado.edu>, Gian Sampson-Wild <gian@tkh.com.au>, Keith Smith <k.smith@bild.org.uk>, Roberto Scano <rscano@iwa-italy.org>, Lisa Seeman <lisa@ubaccess.com>, Stephen Shore <Tumbalaika@aol.com>, Nancy Ward <nward@thedesk.info>, Paul Bowman <pbowman@gmu.edu>, John Slatin <jslatin@mail.utexas.edu>, Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>, Loretta Guarino Reid <lorettaguarino@google.com>, Michael Cooper <cooper@w3.org>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
To: Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>

Judy,

please could you respond to my concerns regarding Guideline 3.1?

It's not me that feels  "that WCAG 2.0 needs to be completely re- 
written" it's the organisations and individuals working in the field  
that I've built relationships with over the past decade. Your  
response is unlikely to encourage them to develop an interest in  
contributing to the WAI process.

in future please could you forward your response to gl so there is a  
public record?

regards

Jonathan Chetwynd



On 3 Feb 2007, at 19:11, Judy Brewer wrote:

Hi Jonathan,

We focused on possible disclaimer text in our last teleconference  
because that seems to be one part of what is needed to address  
concerns that have been expressed about WCAG 2.0 and cognitive,  
language and learning disabilities. Also, there had been good support  
on the first teleconference for developing language to clarify what  
is and isn't covered in WCAG 2.0.

The discussion about disclaimer language in our second teleconference  
took longer than we had planned, but it is only one part of how we're  
hoping to address questions that have been raised. In addition we  
talked briefly about having a separate meeting to go over specific  
comments and questions about the guidelines and success criteria.  
That discussion could include the kind of questions you ask about  
Guideline 3.1 in your message below.

In our second teleconference we also talked briefly about forming a  
task force to look in more depth at medium and longer-term plans for  
addressing issues of cognitive disabilities throughout WAI's work. We  
would like that to be the main focus of our next upcoming  
teleconference (separate scheduling message to come). But we'll still  
need a little more discussion about disclaimer language, to get that  
ready to bring back to the WCAG Working Group for their review and  
discussion.

I know you feel that WCAG 2.0 needs to be completely re-written. I  
don't think that that's likely to happen, but I do know that the WCAG  
Working Group has been looking carefully at the language used in WCAG  
2.0, and is working to clarify it. WAI also plans to develop some  
supporting resources for WCAG 2.0 that will help explain WCAG 2.0 in  
plainer language, and I think that, once available, those resources  
will be useful.

Regards,

- Judy

At 09:49 AM 1/22/2007 +0000, Jonathan Chetwynd wrote:
> Judy & Gregg,
>
> Judy limited the recent call to discussing a disclaimer to be
> inserted at the beginning of the WCAG2 draft. If members of the
> WCAGWG intends to encourage wider participation and consensus, they
> will need to ensure this work is continued throughout the current
> draft .
>
> For example:
> When making assertions it is helpful if the axioms relied on are  
> self- evident.
> Where this is not the case, evidence  and references should be  
> provided:
>
> On what basis is "Guideline 3.1 Make text content readable and
> understandable." defined by "lower secondary education level"?
> What fraction of the web population are included in this definition?
> What fraction of the general population is excluded?
> Where is the statement explaining why this group is excluded?
> Where is the link to a statement describing how to include them?
>
> The whole WCAG2 draft needs a thorough revision.
> This is a significant and challenging task.
>
> regards
>
> Jonathan Chetwynd
> "On behalf of more than forty signatories to the formal objection."
>
>

-- 
Judy Brewer    +1.617.258.9741    http://www.w3.org/WAI
Director, Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI), World Wide Web  
Consortium (W3C)
MIT/CSAIL Building 32-G526
32 Vassar Street
Cambridge, MA,  02139,  USA
Received on Sunday, 4 February 2007 08:39:36 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:49 GMT