W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2016

RE: WCAG Next Possible Models

From: Malamud, Mark (NIH/NHLBI) [E] <malamudm@nhlbi.nih.gov>
Date: Fri, 8 Apr 2016 18:42:34 +0000
To: 'John Foliot' <john.foliot@deque.com>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, "w3c-wai-ig@w3.org" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>, 'WebAIM Discussion List' <webaim-forum@list.webaim.org>
Message-ID: <5CC7B04A11EDEB4CB366C3BC0AE9A909312FE3EE@msgb10.nih.gov>
I prefer Option 1, and agree with Jason White that the focus should continue to be on universal design.

Although I am attracted to 1.2 WCAG 2.0 plus extensions by technology or platform because it is easier to trouble-shoot  when testing -- it reminds me of the way the old Standards got pigeon-holed so quickly.

That approach seems to run counter to the concept of universal design and the focus of WCAG 2.0, which shifted from the tech to the person (i.e., the person/tech interface challenges), by organizing around the Principles.

Mark Malamud
Accessibility Specialist
Information Technology and Applications Center (ITAC)
National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI), NIH, DHHS
  On Detail
  NIH Office of the Chief Information Officer
  6555 Rock Spring Drive, Suite 300, Room 3NE-34
  Bethesda, MD. 20817, Mail Stop: 4801
  (301) 496-5032

From: John Foliot [mailto:john.foliot@deque.com]
Sent: Friday, April 08, 2016 12:36 PM
To: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>; w3c-wai-ig@w3.org; 'WebAIM Discussion List' <webaim-forum@list.webaim.org>
Subject: WCAG Next Possible Models

[Please share freely]
The WCAG Working Group is looking for public feedback and comment on the creation of extensions to WCAG 2.0. Your input is being solicited today and comments should be forwarded to the WAI IG Mailing list with the subject line: WCAG Next Possible Models. Background information and more details on how to comment follow.
Earlier in March, a discussion started off at the W3C on what WCAG.next should look like. That initial discussion has actually forked into two related discussion, the differentiator being a question of time.
The first discussion revolves around a big-picture major revision of WCAG. This discussion is looking at what the next generation of accessibility guidance should look like, and it incorporates thoughts around integrating UAAG 2.0 and ATAG 2.0 into a more integrated approach. This is an exciting idea, and it is envisioned that this will be a 3 to 5 year undertaking (perhaps longer).
Slightly more pressing however is the fact that there are a number of Task Forces at the W3C that are looking at building ‘extensions’ to WCAG 2.0, to provide additional guidance (including possible new Success Criteria, Understanding and Techniques documents) around topics such as Mobile accessibility, Low Vision concerns, and addressing the needs of those with Cognitive disabilities. Some of this effort is becoming fairly mature, and so the second discussion is around what are we going to do with all of this guidance and content. The content coming from the Task Forces is nearing completion, and it is badly needed today. I think most can agree that we cannot wait another 3 to 5 years for a major “refresh” of WCAG 2.0., and the Working Group has been chartered to create extensions to WCAG 2.0 in this interim period.
The WCAG Working Group are now looking at what then, exactly, will WCAG 2.0 extensions look like?
So far, discussion has surface 4 potential “strawman” possibilities, which can be found at: https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/WCAG_Next_Possible_Models

We have not ruled out other possible models however, and so there still exists the possibility of yet a 5th , 6th , or more possible strawman proposal(s). Critical to the final decision however is that we also ensure broad public comment and input in an effort to ensure we have the best possible model moving forward.
Which is the purpose of this email.
If you use, or are impacted by the use of, WCAG 2.0 we want to hear your thoughts. The goal is to gather as much feedback as possible over the next 2 or 3 weeks so that an informed decision can be made. This is your opportunity to contribute to that discussion. Please note that at this time nothing is committed one way or the other, and there exists the possibility that unanimity may never surface, but every effort is being made to ensure that stakeholders have an opportunity to speak up.
If you would like to comment on this activity, please review the possible models already brought forward at https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/WCAG_Next_Possible_Models.

·        What are the Pros? The Cons?

·        Do you have any other comments to add?

·        Do you have a preference?

·        Do you have another potential model not yet contemplated?
All of these questions are in scope, and we’re excited to hear everyone’s thoughts on this topic.
To ensure we can get as broad a community feedback as possible, we are using the WAI IG Mailing list at w3c-wai-ig@w3.org<http://mailto:w3c-wai-ig@w3.org> with the Subject Line: WCAG Next Possible Models. This public mailing list is open to all to participate in, once you have signed up to be a member of that list. Information on how to join the WAI-IG mailing list can be found at https://www.w3.org/WAI/IG/#mailinglist

Please note that we are also currently looking for a possible means of collecting anonymous feedback as well, and if/when we have that ability we will further advise.
Our goal is to gather this feedback over the next 2 or 3 weeks, and present out findings to the Working Group with a proposed recommendation on how to move forward. While comments and feedback to the WCAG Working Group are always welcome, we hope to wrap this up fairly quickly, and so if you wish to comment you are urged to do so soon.
This is an unique opportunity to gather community feedback, and we look forward to hearing your thoughts.
John Foliot
Principal Accessibility Strategist
Austin, TX

Deque Systems Inc.
2121 Cooperative Way, Suite 210,
Herndon, VA 20171-5344
Office: 703-225-0380

Advancing the mission of digital accessibility and inclusion

Received on Friday, 8 April 2016 18:43:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 8 April 2016 18:43:11 UTC