RE: Silver Requirements Update

Hi Rachael,

+1

John

John Rochford
University of Massachusetts Medical School
Eunice Kennedy Shriver Center
Director, INDEX Program
Faculty, Family Medicine & Community Health
www.DisabilityInfo.org
About Me<https://johnrochford.com/?promo=email_sig&utm_source=product&utm_medium=email_sig&utm_campaign=edit_panel&utm_content=plaintext>
EasyText.AI<https://easytext.ai/>
Schedule a meeting with me.<http://bit.ly/CallJR>

Confidentiality Notice:
This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential, proprietary, and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender immediately and destroy or permanently delete all copies of the original message.

From: Rachael Bradley Montgomery <rachael@accessiblecommunity.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2020 10:01 AM
To: public-cognitive-a11y-tf <public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Silver Requirements Update

Hello,

We discussed this in the COGA meeting and made a few clarifications. Please review the text below and send a +1 or recommended changes if it is not OK.

4.1 Broader disability support

All Silver guidance has tests or procedures so that the results can be verified. Some guidance may use true/false verification but other guidance may use other ways of measuring (for example: rubrics, sliding scale, task-completion, user research with people with disabilities, and more) where appropriate so that more needs of people with disabilities can be included. This includes particular attention to accessibility for individuals with low vision, limited vision, and cognitive and learning disabilities, whose needs can be better met with a broader testing approach.

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 7:48 AM Rachael Bradley Montgomery <rachael@accessiblecommunity.org<mailto:rachael@accessiblecommunity.org>> wrote:
Hello,

COGA expressed concern about the Silver Requirements needing a requirement that focuses more on the needs of people with disabilities. The Silver Taskforce reworded requirement 4.1 to to address the request. Please see the old and new version below. We would like an OK at today's meeting if this meets COGA's request. If you will not make today's meeting, please write back with a +1 if you approve this or changes needed.

Current Version

4.1 Multiple ways

All Silver guidance has tests or procedures so that the results can be verified. In addition to the current true/false success criteria, other ways of measuring (for example, rubrics, sliding scale, task-completion, user research with people with disabilities, and more) can be used where appropriate so that more needs of people with disabilities can be included.
Proposed Revision

4.1 Broader disability support

All Silver guidance has tests or procedures so that the results can be verified. In addition to the current true/false success criteria, other ways of measuring (for example, rubrics, sliding scale, task-completion, user research with people with disabilities, and more) can be used where appropriate so that more needs of people with disabilities can be included. This includes particular attention to accessibility for individuals with low vision, cognitive and learning disabilities, whose needs can be better met with a broader testing approach.


--
Rachael Montgomery, PhD
Director, Accessible Community
rachael@accessiblecommunity.org<mailto:rachael@accessiblecommunity.org>

"I will paint this day with laughter;
I will frame this night in song."
 - Og Mandino