- From: Charles Hall <hallmediamobile@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2020 13:48:00 -0400
- To: Jeanne Spellman <jspellman@spellmanconsulting.com>
- Cc: public-a11y-functional-needs@w3.org
- Message-Id: <98692C3C-74A3-4E7E-A3A5-9BBF260E6CF5@gmail.com>
An inheritor would [mostly] be other W3C documents (whether or not they are on a TR track or normative). So in this case, WCAG 3 would inherit the subset of functional needs that are relevant and appropriate. Another potential inheritor would be any external organizations or regulatory bodies that cite the list. Hypothetical example mapping: Use with limited hearing: W3C WCAG3; FAST; XAUR; MAUR External Section 508; National Association of Deaf (sorry these are both US specific) Use with sensorineural hearing loss (limited frequency range): W3C XAUR; MAUR; CSS Aural External ISO; Bluetooth SIG Alternatively, once we collaboratively resolve which functional needs belong in WCAG 3; the burden could simply fall to the inheritor to cite this master, and no mapping would be necessary. Cheers, Charles Hall Senior Accessibility Designer Invited Expert, W3C AGWG & Silver TF Chair, W3C IDIW CG Member, Ferndale Accessibility & Inclusion Advisory Commission > On Jul 16, 2020, at 1:30 PM, Jeanne Spellman <jspellman@spellmanconsulting.com> wrote: > > What do you mean by "mapping to an inheritor"? I can think of several meanings and I would like to be clear what you mean. > > I like the highest level list. KUTGW! > > Thanks, > > jeanne > > On 7/16/2020 10:07 AM, Charles Hall wrote: >> My current working assumption is that regardless of the form this collection takes, a subset of needs would be available for and identified as mapping to an inheritor – including WCAG3. >> >> In its current draft list format, the number of items may increase as I better understand and am able to articulate the unique intersectional needs of race and disability, as well as once the cognitive needs are reviewed by a wider audience. But I am confident that there will be consensus on a list that is larger and more inclusive than the EN 301 549 set, but less than the entire list. >> >> Currently, I think the highest level categories are: >> Essential >> Sensory >> Physical >> Cognitive >> Independence >> >> >> Charles Hall >> >> Senior Accessibility Designer >> Invited Expert, W3C AGWG & Silver TF >> Chair, W3C IDIW CG >> Member, Ferndale Accessibility & Inclusion Advisory Commission >> >>> On Jul 15, 2020, at 1:11 PM, Jeanne Spellman <jspellman@spellmanconsulting.com <mailto:jspellman@spellmanconsulting.com>> wrote: >>> >>> I know this is premature, but something to keep in mind. >>> >>> I was looking at the list of functional needs and realized that for our purposes in Silver, we will need a much smaller list at a higher level categories. >>> >>> >>> >>
Received on Thursday, 16 July 2020 17:48:18 UTC