Re: Draft Silver Response

Hi



My main points are in the email on silver scoring

I think it is a great direction



"Doesn’t advantage one disability over another" - this is really important but maybe could be clearer , such as clarifying that this includes individuals, disabilities such as autism, and not just large groups such as coga disabilities.



I also suggest they o define accessibility and give examples - so they know what they are working toward IE - someone who could use the content can not because of design or coding choices - then it is not accessible to that person.



Then the extent that this is addressed as part of the grade. Hence my proposal for user testing /user inclusion focus



i do not think that A very complex scoring system may make it difficult for people with cognitive disabilities to use is key issue.  The key issue is that we get content we can use , not that we have jobs in accessibility evaluation.



Usability testing is important - but it can be done via your friend with ADD/dyslexia, your aunt who forgets things, and your friend's brother who has ASD. It is not hard. You just have to look. Also after you have tested a site or two you know what people will find hard, and following the design guided will  work as well.  We need to give people the confidence to do this type of testing and see the people around them.



Also please review my proposal at https://docs.google.com/document/d/1kD1zq1CSvrIB154R9WzdZX-T9YD5Ydct1Yky2wppeyI/edit?usp=drive_web&ouid=110409080524773921565 


All the best  ..Lisa Seeman



***DRAFT BEGINS HERE***  



To: Silver Taskforce

From: COGA Taskforce

Re: Silver Conformance Models



Hello,



Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the proposed conformance models. We recognize they are in an early phase at this point and hope that we can continue to talk with you as they progress. Our comments at this time are as follows:

"Doesn’t advantage one disability over another" - this is really important but maybe could be clearer , such as clarifying that this includes individuals, disabilities such as autism, and not just large groups such as coga disabilities.

Usability testing with individuals with disabilities is a very helpful for to support COGA but there are risks such as difficulty in gaining legislative adoption and the possibility teams will intentionally create less usable systems to ensure "good" usability test results. In addition, lack of funding available in many government programs and small organizations may make usability testing difficult. Any model should work to reduce these risks while still including usability as an important component.

There is a risk for COGA  in weighting issues by severity as small issues can lead to fatigue but individually would not be "severe."  There is also a risk in measuring by groups as COGA represents a very diverse set of users with overlapping but sometimes distinct user needs. If, for example, visual disabilities are broken out into subgroups such as blind, low vision, and color blind then COGA should also be broken out into distinct such groups such as Dyslexia, Aphasia, Non-verbal - Severe Speech and Language impairments, Aging and Dementia, Intellectual Disability, Autism, Dyscalculia, Anxiety, and Depression. 

We also believe that any conformance model should begin with and map to user needs. 


Thank you again,




Cognitive and Learning Disabilities Accessibility Task Force







On Wed, Sep 4, 2019 at 1:12 PM Rachael Bradley Montgomery <mailto:rachael@accessiblecommunity.org> wrote:








-- 

Rachael Montgomery, PhD

Director, Accessible Community

mailto:rachael@accessiblecommunity.org

















Hello,



Based the discussions we had, I've drafted a strawman response to send to Silver.  I tried to draw from the minutes and emails I've seen but I've likely missed or misstated something. I would appreciate your feedback. We will disucss this briefly at tomorrow's meeting but please send edits to the group.



Thank you,



Rachael



***DRAFT BEGINS HERE***



To: Silver Taskforce

From: COGA Taskforce

Re: Silver Conformance Models



Hello,



Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the proposed conformance models. We recognize they are in an early phase at this point and hope that we can continue to talk with you as they progress. Our comments at this time are as follows:

A very complex scoring system may make it difficult for people with cognitive disabilities to use.  These drafts are so complex right now that it is difficult to review and provide feedback. Whatever solution is suggested, it needs to include plain text alternatives to the formulas and complexity to allow for inclusive review and comment.

Usability testing with individuals with disabilities is a key need to support COGA but there are risks such as difficulty in gaining legislative adoption and the possibility teams will intentionally create less usable systems to ensure "good" usability test results.  Any model should work to reduce these risks while still including usability as an important component.

There is a risk for COGA  in weighting issues by severity as small issues can lead to fatigue but individually would not be "severe."  There is also a risk in measuring by groups as COGA represents a very diverse set of users with overlapping but sometimes distinct user needs. If, for example, visual disabilities are broken out into subgroups such as blind, low vision, and color blind then COGA should also be broken out into distinct such groups such as Dyslexia, Aphasia, Non-verbal - Severe Speech and Language impairments, Aging and Dementia,  Down Syndrome, Autism, Dyscalculia, Anxiety, and Depression. 

We also believe that any conformance model should begin with nad map to user needs. 


Thank you again,




Cognitive and Learning Disabilities Accessibility Task Force