WCAG 3.0 public comment - 5.3 Overall Scores

Hi, 

Please excuse my use of this email address - I’m in the process of getting a GitHub login, but just wanted to send some quick feedback as I read the document.

Reading 5.3 Overall Scores in W3C Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 3.0, W3C Editor's Draft 03 August 2021. It states "Conformance at the bronze level requires no critical errors and at least 3.5 total score and at least a 3.5 score within each functional category."

Seeing as a score of 2 is described as Fair, 3 is defined as Good, and a score of 4 is defined as Excellent.  Why was a score of 3.5 settled on?

My comment is that 3.5 feels arbitrarily high, and a little odd given it does not equate to a named level.  It is almost so high that it’s not worth mentioning the Fair, or Good as being in any way worthwhile targets (although I do understand the average system).

I wonder if there will be a perception issue with regard telling the user to immediately go further than Good.  

The question will undoubtedly be asked by some - isn’t “Good" good enough, and if not - why isn’t “Good" good enough?   The likely needs to be a very clear explanation of how / why 3.5 is a good choice.

This may well have been covered intensely already, so apologies in advance.  Just thought I’d send the comment along.

Very best regards

Alistair 

Alistair Garrison
CEO / Founder Accesseo Limited
((Newly) Invited Expert - AGWG)

Received on Wednesday, 4 August 2021 15:27:48 UTC