W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > October to December 2011

Access Board Releases New Draft of ICT Rule for Public Comment

From: Bailey, Bruce <Bailey@Access-Board.gov>
Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2011 13:44:50 -0500
Message-ID: <23EB0B5A59FF804E9A219B2C4EF3AE3D02363350@Access-Exch.Access-Board.gov>
To: "WCAG" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
I just posted this to the IG list.

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ig/2011OctDec/0149.html


 

The U.S. Access Board has released for public comment a revised draft of updated accessibility requirements for information and communication technology (ICT) covered by Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act and Section 255 of the Telecommunications Act.  This latest version includes changes made in response to public feedback received on an earlier draft issued last year.  The released draft is available for public comment until March 7.  During the comment period, the Board will hold public hearings in Washington, D.C. on January 11 and at the annual CSUN Conference in San Diego on March 1.

http://www.access-board.gov/news/ict-draft-rule.htm 

http://federalregister.gov/a/2011-31462 

 

I probably should have included the direct link for commenting:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-ig/2011OctDec/0149.html


 

For this group in particular, I would also highlight two of the questions we ask:

 

http://www.federalregister.gov/a/2011-31462/p-60


 

Question 5: The 2011 ANPRM requires Web sites to be accessible to individuals with disabilities by conforming to WCAG 2.0. WCAG 2.0 allows a non-conforming (i.e., inaccessible) Web page to be considered compliant if there is an accessible mechanism for reaching an accessible version of the Web page that is up to date and contains the same information and functionality as the inaccessible Web page. A web page that meets all these criteria qualifies as a “conforming alternate version” and is intended to provide individuals with disabilities equivalent access to the same information and functionality as the non-conforming web page. However, unrestricted use of conforming alternate versions may facilitate the emergence of two separate Web sites: One for individuals with disabilities and another for individuals without disabilities. Alternatively, restricting the use of conforming alternate versions may result in significant costs to federal departments and agencies by limiting their options for providing accessible content.

 

Should the Board restrict the use of conforming alternate versions? The Board seeks comments on whether allowing inaccessible content, even with conforming alternate versions, negatively affects the usability and accessibility of Web sites by individuals with disabilities. The Board also requests comments on the difficulty or costs that may be incurred if federal departments or agencies are not free to use conforming alternate versions of content along with inaccessible content.

 

http://www.federalregister.gov/a/2011-31462/p-65 

 

Question 9: As discussed above, the subsection for WCAG 2.0 conformance (E207.2) for user interface components and content of platforms and applications is intended to set a single standard for user interfaces, without regard to underlying rendering mechanisms, such as web browsers, operating systems, or platforms. Is applying the WCAG 2.0 Success and Conformance criteria to electronic documents and applications outside the web browser environment sufficient and clear to users, or should the Board provide further clarification? Are there other accessibility standards more applicable to user interface components and content of platforms and applications than WCAG 2.0 that the Board should reference?

 

Received on Thursday, 8 December 2011 18:45:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 8 December 2011 18:45:19 GMT