"EN 301 549 vs WCAG - Gaps and Bridges" Study Group [via Nordic Accessibility Community Group]

Participants



Umut Gültekin, Robin Whittleton, Sander Nijsingh, Christer Janzon, Thomas Nielsen, Miia Kirsi, Erik Gustafsson Spagnoli.



Agenda




Discuss our approach: How can we benefit from researching, discussing, and learning about the differences and connections between EN 301 549 and WCAG?



Plan future efforts: What specific questions or areas should we prioritize in our study group?



Collaborate effectively: How can we ensure that our discussions contribute to the broader understanding of accessibility standards?




Whether you’ve been working with these standards for a while or are just beginning to explore them, we encourage everyone to join the discussion. This session will be a collaborative effort to outline the goals and methods of our study group, and your input will help shape the direction we take.



Meeting notes




EAA, hard to know what to test in the EN-standard. 11.7 User preferences https://accessible.canada.ca/en-301-549-accessibility-requirements-ict-products-and-services-11-software#_Toc66969652

Sander: Badly written and hard to test.



Robin: Unit measurement, inches vs cm, currency etc.

Very complex when two currencies needs to be displayed.





Color

High contrast, Dark mode are included in EN-standard.





If you fail Name, Role Value - why fail both that and EN 11.5.2.5 Object information?



Has any one compared reports from different countries?

In the Netherlands they test only for WCAG as of now and not the EN standard.





A lot harder demands on documents in Canada and assembly manuals for IKEA now needs ALT-texts (where they are today just images without translated texts).





Sander shared how they do for consensus in the Netherlands. https://github.com/WCAG-Audit-Discussions/NL-BE



Miia shared the government agency for monitoring the current and upcoming directive https://www.tillganglighetskrav.fi/



Discussion topics going forward:

Units of measurements - talk more about this.



Look at copies of tests from Nordic countries and compare. What do they fail and do they explain the fail and so on?

It would be great if we as a group could have a consensus on fails and non fails.





Additions to the differences in countries applying more for the EAA apart from the standard.



Set up a repo like the Netherlands.



How does the accessibility documentation (statements) look like in the different EU countries. Create a Github issue.



EN-standard updates, how do we keep track?






Conclusion



There's a lot of uncertainty of different monitoring bodies in different countries. How to know where they are, how they will fail, what kind of documentation do they demand? There also seems to be differences in the accessibility community in views of what is included and not. Our main suggestion on going forward is to set up a Github repo so we all can share the effort of documenting, adding questions and discussing EN and WCAG topics for the Nordic countries. By this we will slowly but surely find a common ground on how to test, what to test and have a common place for information about monitoring.



Erik GS and Sander will set this up together and share with the rest of the group when we can start collaborating.



----------

This post sent on Nordic Accessibility Community Group



'"EN 301 549 vs WCAG - Gaps and Bridges" Study Group'

https://www.w3.org/community/nordic-accessibility/2024/11/07/en-301-549-vs-wcag-gaps-and-bridges-study-group/



Learn more about the Nordic Accessibility Community Group: 

https://www.w3.org/community/nordic-accessibility

Received on Thursday, 7 November 2024 09:56:37 UTC