Re: PR is up for WCAG 2.0 In Brief 'Why it's important'

[CC: wai-eo-editors]

Hi Mike and Michele,

Sorry I've been slow to make time for this. :(

I agree with Mike that "Why it’s important has morphed for some of the 2.0 stuff from what it was in the 2.2/2.1 material. ...But what I’m seeing on the 2.0 stuff on the third line is a slight deviation ... the third line is now almost a restatement of the objective line ".

And I think we want to go back to the basic approach that EOWG and AG refined in https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/wcag/new-in-22/
* Some people cannot use a mouse to drag items.
* Some people with physical impairments cannot click small buttons that are close together.
* People who can't use a mouse need to see what has keyboard focus.
* Some people with cognitive disabilities have difficulty remembering what they entered before.
* Some people with cognitive disabilities cannot solve puzzles, memorize a username and password, or retype one-time passcodes.
* Some people with cognitive disabilities can't do puzzles, including identifying objects and non-text information they previously supplied.
* Many people can't see small changes in visual appearance, including older people.
* People who need help can find it more easily if it's in the same place.

For those, the basic formula is:
* People with [type of disability] can't [thing that the SC addresses].

I added some input to some of the first few. For example
* "Why it's important: People who can’t fully see multimedia content can understand it."
-> "Why it's important: People who are blind and some with low vision can't see the visual content."
* "Why it's important: People who are deaf or hard of hearing can understand real-time audio content."
-> "Why it's important: People who are Deaf or hard of hearing cannot adequately hear audio content."
* "Why it's important: Users reliant on the keyboard can move around pages efficiently."
-> "Why it's important: People who can't use a mouse need to get to content on a page efficiently."
* "Why it's important</dt><dd>People can address errors faster and with reduced effort."
-> "Why it's important: Some people with disabilities, including cognitive disabilities, won't be able to figure out how to correct errors unless they have clear information."

... then I ran out of steam.

Sorry to throw a bit of a wrench in here. However, I do think we want to stick with the previous approach. So that will require more editing.

~Shawn


On 25-Aug-23 3:29 PM, Michael Gower wrote:
> Okay, I’ve done another pass of the information, and have made a number of suggestions to address this. Please review and Thumbs up or offer suggestions or other comments.
> 
> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3356/files <https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3356/files>
> 
> Mike
> 
> *From: *Michael Gower <michael.gower@ca.ibm.com>
> *Date: *Friday, August 25, 2023 at 10:51 AM
> *To: *Michele Williams <mawilliams031@outlook.com>, Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>
> *Cc: *Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
> *Subject: *Re: PR is up for WCAG 2.0 In Brief 'Why it's important'
> 
> Hi Gang,
> 
> I’m just going through this PR now and something that is striking me is that the Why it’s important has morphed for some of the 2.0 stuff from what it was in the 2.2/2.1 material.
> 
> Here’s the first of the 2.2 ones https://w3c.github.io/wcag/understanding/focus-not-obscured-minimum.html <https://w3c.github.io/wcag/understanding/focus-not-obscured-minimum.html>
> 
> *Goal*
> 
> Keep the focused item visible.
> 
> *What to do*
> 
> Ensure when an item gets keyboard focus, it is at least partially visible.
> 
> *Why it's important*
> 
> People who can't use a mouse need to see what has keyboard focus.
> 
> What I see there is that we have listed it as: objective, action and reason. That seems to work very well.
> 
> But what I’m seeing on the 2.0 stuff on the third line is a slight deviation. Here’s the first one in the PR
> 
> Goal
> 
> Users can identify and learn what abbreviations mean.
> 
> What to do
> 
> Provide the expanded form of abbreviations to users.
> 
> Why it's important
> 
> More people, especially those with cognitive disabilities, can understand the meaning of content.
> 
> The objective and action are still working, but what I’m seeing on the third line is now almost a restatement of the objective line. It’s not the end of the world, but it doesn’t seem to work as well.
> 
> I’m thinking it would work better as something like:
> Some people, especially those with cognitive disabilities, may not understand the shortened form.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Mike
> 
> *From: *Michael Gower <michael.gower@ca.ibm.com>
> *Date: *Wednesday, August 23, 2023 at 12:14 PM
> *To: *Michele Williams <mawilliams031@outlook.com>, Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>
> *Subject: *PR is up for WCAG 2.0 In Brief 'Why it's important'
> 
> I thought you folks might want to look through the PR.
> 
> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3356 <https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/3356>
> 
> The way I’ve done this, in regard to the draft Docs document, is that where we had alignment on phrases, I accepted the suggestions (so they now show up as black text). Ones where I still feel like there may be an idea for another version, or where I made new changes, I’ve left in the suggestion state. There’s no need for you to look at the Google Doc anymore – put your attention on making suggestions in the PR -- but it’s how I’m planning to prioritize a ‘second look’ https://docs.google.com/document/d/1V1GYLT5pySMj1wOptdhKXxsMvx0CunzFNyyLHYo81UY/edit <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1V1GYLT5pySMj1wOptdhKXxsMvx0CunzFNyyLHYo81UY/edit>
> 
> Mike
>

Received on Monday, 28 August 2023 21:21:50 UTC