RE: Project to unify User Interface for accessing WCAG Supplemental Guidance

This email contains my comments, questions and suggestions for the Requirements Analysis document.  Note that while my input is focused on areas of concern, I am generally supportive of this effort.


Editorial:  The first sentence under "Background"

Current:  W3C/WAI has a wealth of guidance on how to make the web accessible by applying our standards. But we could improve how it is exposed:

Proposed:  W3C/WAI has a wealth of guidance on how to make the web accessible by applying our standards. But we could improve how this guidance is exposed:


indication of accuracy: WAI website includes guidance, some old guidance, and a lot in between. Indicating accuracy or age of content should help.

My comments:  I'm concerned with the reference to "accuracy".  If guidance isn't accurate, wouldn't the best course be to deprecate the guidance?


indication production readiness: we have some technical guidance that explains how to use a technology, but leaves browser support / known browser bugs out of scope (see aria-practices/issue-353#comment-368091861, also the aria-at project). Developers may implement patterns that won't work well (now). Not our fault, clearer labeling and compatibility info could avoid potential inaccessibility (maybe complemented with “Tell AT vendor about this bug” button)

My comments:  This sounds like it will be a maintenance challenge to keep this information updated, as browser version updates aren’t all that infrequent, and the issues with browsers come and go.


indication of requiredness: a lot of our guidance is a way to approach a problem, not the only way.

My comments:  This seems like a risky area to delve into.  How are we going to state “how required” a guideline is?  Yes/No?  Some in-between?  How will we decide the level of requiredness?  Won’t groups who sponsored a particular set of guidance feel that the guidance is required?


include more effective ways for users to be confident that specific guidance is:

timely and relevant in current technology environments

well-supported by assistive technologies

My comments:  This sounds extremely useful, but it also seems like it could be a maintenance challenge.  What will our measure be of “well-supported”, and will we list software and versions that support the guidance?  Do we risk liability if we miss listing some AT, or the company feels that we are miss-representing their level of support?



Charles Adams


-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Lee <> 
Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2020 9:43 AM
To: public-cognitive-a11y-tf <>
Cc: Hidde de Vries <>
Subject: Project to unify User Interface for accessing WCAG Supplemental Guidance


WCAG is supported by various supplementary and non normative documents. 

These support people in better understanding and implementing WCAG an accessibility in general.


Examples include: understanding documents, techniques and cross references. The Cognitive Task Force's documents, including Content Usable (plus web Design Guide) are an integral part of this collection of supporting documentation.


The WCAG Quick Ref, HYPERLINK ";!!GqivPVa7Brio!IXdxm46dlFy4YwG8fMDLQDHi0NY4pnL1BP6m1-PDjgAdT9atkcD6PeSlKWBAF7f7Fg$";!!GqivPVa7Brio!IXdxm46dlFy4YwG8fMDLQDHi0NY4pnL1BP6m1-PDjgAdT9atkcD6PeSlKWBAF7f7Fg$ , was created to make it easier to find and access specific WCAG SCs and related content. However, it has a few issues and does not provide access to all relevant content.


Now, Hidde (W3C Staff) is undertaking a project for the Accessibility Education and Outreach Working Group (EOWG) to provide a unified User Interface for accessing all the WCAG supplemental guidance. Right now, there are draft Requirements Analysis and User Flows documents to explore User Stories.


This project may influence our work on the web Design Guide, or our work may influence the project. The point is to be aware of the project and stay in the loop.


Comments are most welcome for these resources:


# Draft requirements analysis:


HYPERLINK ";!!GqivPVa7Brio!IXdxm46dlFy4YwG8fMDLQDHi0NY4pnL1BP6m1-PDjgAdT9atkcD6PeSlKWCOOiTnKw$";!!GqivPVa7Brio!IXdxm46dlFy4YwG8fMDLQDHi0NY4pnL1BP6m1-PDjgAdT9atkcD6PeSlKWCOOiTnKw$ 



# Draft user flows:


HYPERLINK ";!!GqivPVa7Brio!IXdxm46dlFy4YwG8fMDLQDHi0NY4pnL1BP6m1-PDjgAdT9atkcD6PeSlKWAJjkhqAw$";!!GqivPVa7Brio!IXdxm46dlFy4YwG8fMDLQDHi0NY4pnL1BP6m1-PDjgAdT9atkcD6PeSlKWAJjkhqAw$  







Received on Tuesday, 5 May 2020 22:12:35 UTC