W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > July to September 2015

Re: Level AA exceptions

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gregg@raisingthefloor.org>
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2015 17:09:54 -0500
Message-Id: <796343DF-D988-4DB7-B579-78471B20F278@raisingthefloor.org>
To: Wayne Dick <waynedick@knowbility.org>, IG - WAI Interest Group List list <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>, Phill Jenkins <pjenkins@us.ibm.com>, GLWAI Guidelines WG org <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
I think the answer is simple.    (I know people just want something else - but this is what it means.)

What do the WCAG levels mean?  
A = Minimum to conform to WCAG 
AA = More accessible
AAA = even more accessible, when you can  - But even AAA does not mean that it is accessible to everyone.  As stated in the WCAG - there are people who cannot use AAA conformant content. 

They don’t mean else.    And should not be interpreted to mean anything more.   (e.g.  Level A SC are more important than level AA or more essential or anything else).  It is not even true that Level A are a higher priority than Level AA.   For some sites, some Level A provisions may have little or no effect on the accessibility of the site - while a level AA provision has great impact. 

How did things get assigned to the levels?  -
again it is simply stated.   

Each SC is at it’s level because, after looking at all the factors and considering all the different points of view and public input, it was a consensus of the working group that it be in that level.    


Gregg Vanderheiden

> On Aug 14, 2015, at 11:36 AM, Wayne Dick <waynedick@knowbility.org> wrote:
> What is normative? That really is the issue. I am less concerned informative notes because they are non-binding. Having attempted to explain Level A and Level AA many times to managers and programmers, I have found the logic of Understanding WCAG 2.0, very difficult and not compelling. Phill is correct. There is a gap that needs filling. We need clear language. I think, normative.
> In my opinion it needs to be clear in its responsibility to stake holders, with the user with a disability being at the center.  Web content in all formats is be profoundly robust. The migration to mobile formats has proven this. There is no need that essential functionality needs cannot be met, but we need to address concepts like the American terms, undue burden and fundamental alteration, carefully and land on normative language.  Like all statements in natural language we need to allow for interpretation. Perhaps we need a formal elastic clause that permits variation.
> ​I think what we can all agree on is that, level differentiation needs clarification.  Now that WCAG is beyond the crazy flurry of criticism that it faced in 2008, WCAG WG can revisit these definitions. 
> Phill has identifies a gap, that has confused many implementers. 
> Wayne
Received on Friday, 14 August 2015 22:10:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 13 October 2015 16:21:57 UTC