Re: Your comments on WCAG 2.0 Last Call Working Draft of December, 2007

On Wed, Apr 2, 2008 at 6:09 PM, Sandra Vassallo <S.Vassallo@e-bility.com> wrote:
 > > ----------------------------------------------------------
 > > Comment 2: Clarification of advisory techniques
 > > Source:
 > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-comments-wcag20/2008Feb/0009.html
 > > (Issue ID: 2461)
 > > Status: VERIFIED / NOT ACCEPTED
 > > ----------------------------
 > > Original Comment:
 > > ----------------------------
 > >
 > > I think the concept of advisory (optional) techniques is useful in
 > > providing strategies for enhancing accessibility and usability however
 > > I'm concerned that many of the techniques listed are either:
 > >
 > > * still required to make websites accessible with today's user agents
 > >
 > > * accessibility requirements that are not "testable" but necessary to
 > > make websites accessible to some audiences
 > >
 > > Proposed Change:
 > > Some thoughts...
 > >
 > > Introduce a new techniques category for the equivalent of "until user
 > > agents support" concept in WCAG 1.0 (as the techniques document is not
 > > normative and can be updated, these techniques will be flagged and
 > > could be periodically reviewed or deleted at a later date).
 > >
 > > Change the concept of Advisory Techniques to Qualitative Techniques or
 > > provide a new section for Qualitative Techniques that has the same
 > > status as the Sufficient (Quantitative) Techniques.
 > >
 > > Reword the scoping statement to acknowledge the importance of
 > > qualitative criteria in providing accessible websites emphasizing that
 > > testability is only one part of the accessibility process and needs to
 > > be supported by the Qualitative Techniques as well as user testing by
 > > people with disability wherever possible.
 > >
 > > ---------------------------------------------
 > > Response from Working Group:
 > > ---------------------------------------------
 > >
 > >  We cannot rename advisory techniques as qualitative since only some
 > > of them are qualitative.  Many of the advisory techniques are just as
 > > testable as the sufficient techniques but are advisory for a
 > > collection of other reasons.   Techniques that are 'sufficient' are
 > > already labeled as such.  And as advisory techniques become
 > > 'sufficient' (due to advancing technologies or user agents) they will
 > > be promoted to 'sufficient'.   We have eliminated the 'until user
 > > agent' phrase with this new structure - one that allows provisions to
 > > be moved up to 'sufficient' at any time that they become sufficient to
 > > meet one of the SC.  We agree that advisory techniques are important
 > > to Web accessibility and we have already rewritten the introduction in
 > > our last draft to reflect the important role of advisory techniques.
 > >
 > >
 >   ---------------------------------------------
 >   Response to Response from Working Group:
 >   ---------------------------------------------
 >
 >  Thanks. I appreciate the difficulty in renaming advisory techniques and the
 > importance given to them in the WCAG 2.0 Introduction. However, my concern
 > is still that they are "advisory" only, yet many are required to make
 > websites accessible with today's user agents and necessary from a 'usable
 > accessibility' perspective.
 >
 >  I'm wondering if this is perhaps a result of limiting the definition of
 > accessibility to what is testable in the normative guidelines and therefore
 > they are not or can not be 'sufficient'.
 >
 >  I would like to see a stronger reference in the normative document that
 > states the requirement for both testability and qualitative accessibility
 > criteria in claiming accessibility conformance but appreciate the W3C
 > efforts to date in encouraging authors to view and apply all layers of
 > guidance.
 >
 ---------------------------------------------
 Response from Working Group:
 ---------------------------------------------
 We have added the following sentence to the Introduction to emphasize
 the importance of some of the advisory techniques. However, there is
 no conformance requirement to implement advisory techniques.

 "Some advisory techniques address accessibility barriers that are not
 covered by the testable success criteria."

 Thanks again for the interest that you have taken in these guidelines.
 Could we ask you to let us know whether or not you are satisfied with
 this response by Wed, April 16?



 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

-- 
Ben Caldwell | <caldwell@trace.wisc.edu> 
Trace Research and Development Center <http://trace.wisc.edu>

Received on Friday, 11 April 2008 18:12:03 UTC