W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rqtf@w3.org > June 2019

RE: CAPTCHA advice in WCAG

From: Scott Hollier <scott@hollier.info>
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2019 15:03:05 +0000
To: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net>, "White, Jason J" <jjwhite@ets.org>
CC: "public-rqtf@w3.org" <public-rqtf@w3.org>
Message-ID: <SN6PR01MB4349E54A19F2A399362C4AE3DC100@SN6PR01MB4349.prod.exchangelabs.com>
To Janina

Sounds like a great approach to me Re: ATWG. Would be very happy to be involved in working on this. 


Dr Scott Hollier 
Digital Access Specialist 
Mobile: +61 (0)430 351 909
Web: www.hollier.info
Technology for everyone
Australian Access Awards 2019 Call For Nominations - celebrate best practice by nominating your favourite accessible Australian website or app. It's free!  
Keep up with digital access news by following @scotthollier on Twitter and subscribing to Scott's newsletter. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Janina Sajka <janina@rednote.net> 
Sent: Friday, 7 June 2019 9:28 PM
To: White, Jason J <jjwhite@ets.org>
Cc: Scott Hollier <scott@hollier.info>; public-rqtf@w3.org
Subject: Re: CAPTCHA advice in WCAG

I agree with Jason's comments below and with Scott's suggestion to ask WCAG to revise their guidance to say more.

I would add only one thing. I think the existing guidance should be more blunt. The alt for a CAPTCHA should clearly say that it is a CAPTCHA. At the moment we have obscure implication suggesting that inference. I don't understand the need for indirection, except perhaps for the fact that the term itself is unfamiliar--as our document also acknowledges.

Well, to my mind indirection doesn't make an unfamiliar term more approachable. It just reinforces ignorance.

Jason, if we indeed go to 2nd wide review next week as it still seems we will, I suggest an RQTF topic might be a specific set of recommendations to AGWG along the lines described in your post. I think APA would run a CfC on RQTF's recommendation, then we can formally communicate this to AGWG.


White, Jason J writes:
> I would expect guidance on this topic to be more likely in Silver than in WCAG 2.2, but that's just a prediction derived from experience contributing to WCAG over the years. Sooner would of course be better.
> It also seems to me that there's a general principle emerging from our draft Note: non-interactive security strategies are to be preferred to those requiring interaction from the user. In so far as interaction is required, it should demand as little as possible of the user's sensory, cognitive, and manipulative abilities, consistently with meeting the security objective. The challenge here is that it's a matter of balancing the demands imposed on the user with what is needed to achieve a security goal; and there isn't a single "right answer" to this problem, as we acknowledge.
> This principle doesn't meet the demands for clarity, verifiability, and specificity that need to be met by WCAG success criteria; but it does at least offer a starting point for further development.
> From: Scott Hollier <scott@hollier.info>
> Sent: Friday, June 7, 2019 2:25 AM
> To: public-rqtf@w3.org
> Subject: CAPTCHA advice in WCAG
> To the RQTF
> My connection dropped out just before the end of our meeting on Wednesday, and it was just at the point where there was some discussion from Judy about looking at how CATPCHA guidance could be included in a future WCAG update. In the workshops I run I get asked about CAPTCHA a lot in terms of WCAG and if there is interest in supporting the workflows for a WCAG 2.2 or similar update I'd be happy to get involved if anyone could provide some guidance on how the workflows operate.
> Scott.
> [Scott Hollier logo]Dr Scott Hollier
> Digital Access Specialist
> Mobile: +61 (0)430 351 909
> Web: 
> www.hollier.info<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=h
> ttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.hollier.info&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Cc94793
> 55f4b04195186508d6eb10eddd%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%
> 7C636954855280527944&sdata=jEarg7sD2yhRTCbL7Ab%2BlCNODI16uAlsECTquALbA
> i4%3D&reserved=0>
> Technology for everyone
> Australian Access Awards 2019 Call For Nominations<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.accessibility.org.au%2Fawards&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Cc9479355f4b04195186508d6eb10eddd%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636954855280527944&sdata=Ywr7DcFZxClGPvbnbE0YbiFpXm8ED9iQnHCUnW1M%2FuM%3D&reserved=0> - celebrate best practice by nominating your favourite accessible Australian website or app. It's free!
> Keep up with digital access news by following @scotthollier on Twitter<https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fscotthollier&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Cc9479355f4b04195186508d6eb10eddd%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636954855280527944&sdata=coAw7iLYDzZoM2euO0mreKzCE%2Fz8KCd3Sq935UdoSRE%3D&reserved=0> and subscribing to Scott's newsletter<mailto:newsletter@hollier.info?subject=subscribe>.
> ________________________________
> This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for whom it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute, or take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and delete it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited.
> Thank you for your compliance.
> ________________________________


Janina Sajka

Linux Foundation Fellow
Executive Chair, Accessibility Workgroup:	http://a11y.org

The World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
Chair, Accessible Platform Architectures	http://www.w3.org/wai/apa
Received on Friday, 7 June 2019 15:03:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 17 January 2023 20:26:46 UTC