- From: lisa.seeman <lisa.seeman@zoho.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2015 21:16:26 +0200
- To: Steve Lee <steve@opendirective.com>
- Cc: "Michael Pluke" <Mike.Pluke@castle-consult.com>, public-cognitive-a11y-tf <public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org>, Neil Milliken <Neil.Milliken@bbc.co.uk>
- Message-Id: <14bc750c758.eff8b73f75365.4230067227859412051@zoho.com>
As it becomes easier to test (due to our work) that would automatically impact the implementation of this rule
All the best
Lisa Seeman
Athena ICT Accessibility Projects
LinkedIn, Twitter
---- On Thu, 26 Feb 2015 21:03:45 +0200 Steve Lee<steve@opendirective.com> wrote ----
Yes it's hard to test but at least it signals they should be thinking about it.
Steve Lee
Sent from my mobile device Please excuse typing errors
On 26 Feb 2015 19:01, "Michael Pluke" <Mike.Pluke@castle-consult.com> wrote:
Hi all
I very much like Neil’s wording below. I agree that it is better to try to be more comprehensive.
>From my experiences during the European work, I fear that there may well be objections from industry that this requirement is not testable in any practical way. But that objection will come whichever version of the wording is chosen.
Best regards
Mike
From: Neil Milliken [mailto:Neil.Milliken@bbc.co.uk]
Sent: 26 February 2015 17:02
To: Michael Pluke; lisa.seeman; public-cognitive-a11y-tf
Subject: RE: minutes from 02/23 /2015 coga & 508
Hi all,
Addressing the issues raised by Mike.
I do not have an issue with reframing the language for consistency.
I do however think we should keep the original scope even if it has previously been hard.
Surely it is the driving rationale behind the COGA taskforce to be able "to identify unique requirements for cognitive language and learning disabilities that [are] both testable and widely accepted as appropriate"
We should be aiming for addressing the core issues and not a fraction of what is needed therefore I suggest the following wording:
“302.9 With limited cognition
Where a mode of operation is provided, ICT shall provide at least one mode of operation that is
operable by persons with limited cognition"
NOTE: This requirement is intended to address the needs of persons with limited cognitive, language and learning abilities.”
Kind regards,
Neil
From: Michael Pluke [Mike.Pluke@castle-consult.com]
Sent: 26 February 2015 12:00
To: Neil Milliken; lisa.seeman; public-cognitive-a11y-tf
Subject: RE: minutes from 02/23 /2015 coga & 508
I definitely support the idea to request a functional performance criterion regarding cognitive language and learning disabilities.
When we created EN 301 549 “Accessibility requirements suitable for public procurement of ICT products and services in Europe” we were unable to identify unique requirements for cognitive language and learning disabilities that were both testable and widely accepted as appropriate. We did provide a table identifying which WCAG success criteria might also be beneficial to users in this group. We also included a “functional performance statement” on “Usage with limited cognition” - why ours is a “statement and not a criterion” is a very long story (which will no doubt re-surface during the 508 commenting)!
The titling for a Section 508 success criterion of “With limited cognition” would be more compatible with the other functional performance statement titles (the word “disabilities” is completely absent from Chapter 3). To ensure a broader scope we included a note “This clause is intended to include the needs of persons with limited cognitive, language and learning abilities”.
Unfortunately the text of what Neil proposes for the core requirement differs significantly from the other functional performance criteria. These are heavily based on the approach we took in EN 301 549. They refer to an alternative mode of operation that does not rely on a specific ABILITY. Writing something related to cognitive, language and learning disabilities is extremely difficult!
A suggestion that maybe captures at least a fraction of what is needed is:
“302.9 With limited cognition
ICT shall provide at least one mode of operation that minimizes the need for the user to process information and decide between options.
NOTE: This requirement is intended to address the needs of persons with limited cognitive, language and learning abilities.”
Best regards,
Mike Pluke
Castle Consulting Ltd.
76 Cowper Street
Ipswich
Suffolk
IP4 5JA
England
From: Neil Milliken [mailto:Neil.Milliken@bbc.co.uk]
Sent: 26 February 2015 10:05
To: lisa.seeman; public-cognitive-a11y-tf
Subject: RE: minutes from 02/23 /2015 coga & 508
I was running late for taskforce meeting and then could not get on to Zakim so am making my comments here so that they are on the record.
I absolutely support Lisa’s point of view that clear reference to Cognitive Disabilities must be included in the 508 refresh. To wait for the next refresh in another 17 years time will mean that we have abandoned another generation.
Cognitive disabilities as you are all aware are some of the most common disabilities but equally most under represented when it comes to accessibility and inclusion. We may not have commented previously but we are now. Since the refresh is open for comments now is the time to do so.
I think that Katie Haritos-Shea’s suggestion of including Coga in the Functional Performance Criteria is absolutely necessary as a minimum.
“Add: 302.9 With Cognitive Language and
Learning Disabilities. Where a mode of operation is provided,
ICT shall provide at least one mode of operation that is
operable by persons with Cognitive Language and Learning
Disabilities.”
If the COGA taskforce have techniques ready in time then we should reference them, this is especially important since as I understand it the Access Board will only pointing to WCAG for techniques to meet A & AA.
Why as a Brit do I care about US legislation?
It’s all about harmonisation and precedence setting;
As EU and US legislation looks to cross reference, standardise and harmonise we run the risk of creating an ecosystem of compliancy with standards and therefore with the laws that effectively excludes some of the largest groups of people with disabilities.
Kind regards,
Neil Milliken
From: lisa.seeman [lisa.seeman@zoho.com]
Sent: 26 February 2015 08:57
To: public-cognitive-a11y-tf
Subject: minutes from 02/23 /2015
The bot was being rest so our minutes from this weeks call are a bit late being published
http://www.w3.org/2015/02/23-coga-minutes.html
and http://www.w3.org/2015/02/23-coga-minutes.html,text for the text only version
n
All the best
Lisa Seeman
Athena ICT Accessibility Projects
LinkedIn, Twitter
Received on Thursday, 26 February 2015 19:18:57 UTC