Re: Subgroups proposal for support personlization and important request from coga

> downgraded it to AAA from AA

That doesn't seem correct. AAA is the HIGHEST of the 3 conformance
levels so shouldn't that be 'upgraded' or perhasp level A??

Steve Lee
OpenDirective http://opendirective.com


On 17 July 2017 at 19:08, lisa.seeman <lisa.seeman@zoho.com> wrote:
> Hi Folks
>
> Here is the draft email for wcag. Let me know if there are any issues with
> it. I will need to send it tomorrow morning.
>
>
> ---
> Hi WCAG
>
> A subgroup from last weeks Thursday's call (Andrew Mike, Chris and John )
> have proposed alternative SC for support personlization.
> The most important difference is they have downgraded it to AAA from AA.
>
> The COGA task force are torn. On the one hand without this SC many people
> can not use most web content at all - that should make it level AA or level
> A. On the other hand, AAA is a better then nothing.
>
> The resolution from COGA's end is to ask WCAG if there is a way we can make
> a personlization AA SC, which encourages marking the context of some
> elements.  We would prefer requiring less at AA, even having loopholes at
> AA, then a requiring more but at  AAA. However if there is no way forward at
> AA we will go with the new proposal. (Ways to move forward could include:
> further  limit the scope; remove  level of importance for page
> comprehension; and use and add exceptions or anything else for that
> matter...)
>
>  All the other changes in the proposal are  fine from  COGA's perspectives
> if WCAG prefers them. (Other differences between the proposals include: the
> new proposal has a broader scope  and; the new proposal  has an exception
> where the technologies being used do not support personalization metadata.
> The problem with this is something can conform and then not conform as
> technologies change. So in the old wording we had give people a different
> way to conform in case metadata is not supported.)
>
> Please could you read the alternative wording bellow and let us know if, in
> your opinion, there is any way forward at AA.
>
>
> Option 1  (New AAA proposal)
>
> Personalization Metadata (AAA)
>
> For pages that contain user interface components, personalization metadata
> is used to provide contextual information for content, except where the
> technologies being used do not support personalization metadata.
>
>
>
>
> Contextual information (definition):
>
> Information which provides additional meaning for an object, such as the
> object’s purpose, level of importance for page comprehension and use,
> position in a process, relationship to other objects and processes, etc.
>
>
>
> Option 2 (the existing proposal - AA)
>
> For pages that contain interactive controls, one of the following is true:
>
> a mechanism is available for personalization of content that enables the
> user to add symbols to common form elements, common navigation elements and
> common interactive controls OR
> contextual information is available for common form elements, common
> navigation elements and common interactive controls is programmatically
> available.
>
>
>
> -------------
>
> For both case we will also want to:
>
>       Review existing SC for new techniques and/or add COGA-impacting
> examples to existing techniques to clarify the extent that existing
> semantics provide benefits to COGA users.
>       Add clarifications to the Understanding document for existing SC,if
> that can help COGA SC to move to A or AA in the upcoming rounds of WCAG
> development.
>       Develop the supplemental document
>
> All the best
>
> Lisa Seeman
>
> LinkedIn, Twitter
>
>

Received on Monday, 17 July 2017 19:23:44 UTC