- From: Loretta Guarino Reid <lorettaguarino@google.com>
- Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2007 15:52:46 -0800
- To: "Geert Freyhoff" <G.Freyhoff@inclusion-europe.org>
- Cc: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
We had considered requiring that the supplemental text be clearly labeled except that adding pictures and diagrams should be a natural process and requiring authors to label them as being supplemental would defeat the objective of making this a common practice to automatically include this information as a natural, primary part of the presentation. Regards, Loretta Guarino Reid, WCAG WG Co-Chair Gregg Vanderheiden, WCAG WG Co-Chair Michael Cooper, WCAG WG Staff Contact On behalf of the WCAG Working Group > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Comment 3: Clearly identify supplemental content or alternate version > Source: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-comments-wcag20/2007Jun/0303. > html > (Issue ID: 2158) > ---------------------------- > Original Comment: > ---------------------------- > > People with cognitive disabilities have difficulties in reading and > understanding text. This has been recognized in success criterion 3.1.5. > This also means that they have difficulties identifying on a website > which of the contents is the supplemental content or alternate version > that would be accessible for them. > > Therefore, supplemental content or an alternate version must be clearly > identified as being accessible for people with cognitive disabilities > without requiring them to read the whole text. This can be done for > example by using the European Easy-to-Read Logo > (www.inclusion-europe.org/etr) that is already used for this purpose in > many European countries. A logo comparable to the logo for physical > access has the advantage to be language independent. > > Proposed Change: > To insert a new success criterion 3.1.5.bis or modify the criterion > 3.1.5 as follows: > > Supplemental content or alternate versions for people with cognitive > disabilities must be clearly identified by an access symbol and must be > accessible from the referring page by one click. > > Example of success criterion 3.1.5.bis: > > Website of the European Commission, DG Employment and Social Affairs at > http://ec.europa.eu/employment_social/fundamental_rights/index_en.htm > > --------------------------------------------- > Response from Working Group: > --------------------------------------------- > > We have added "clearly marked" to SC 3.1.5 so that it reads: > "When text requires reading ability more advanced than the lower > secondary education level, clearly marked supplemental content or an > alternate version is available that does not require reading ability > more advanced than the lower secondary education level." > We have also added an advisory technique: > "Clearly marking, by use of text or icon, content which has been > optimized for easy reading (future link)" > > We are not mandating any particular markings since we do not want to > limit the use of this technique. > > ----------------------------------------------- > INCLUSION EUROPE COMMENT: > ----------------------------------------------- > > Since simple access is of paramount importance for people with > intellectual disabilities, Inclusion Europe suggests the following > wording: "When text requires reading ability more advanced than the > lower secondary education level, clearly marked and accessible with one > click supplemental content or alternate version..." >
Received on Tuesday, 11 December 2007 23:53:06 UTC