Re: Costs of testing with Silver

Hi Charles,

> It has never been stated that Silver would {n} number of new or additional success criteria – only that it would simplify the language and format of the existing ones and establish a governance and contribution model that makes it easier to edit them, expire them and yes, add them.

Point 2 in the design principles [1] is that it should “Support a measurement and conformance structure that can include guidance for a broad range of disabilities, including low vision and cognitive accessibility needs.”

There is wide recognition that we struggle to include COGA requirements because they are difficult to fit into the WCAG 2.x structure.

Therefore if we change that structure, partly to include those types of requirement, there will by definition be more requirements.
We aren’t throwing away the current criteria, that will probably form the majority of Silver 1.0 in some way, but there isn’t much point in doing Silver unless it expands to cover more requirements.


> there must be a model for determining cost as well as a definition of ‘reasonable’. If there is a majority opinion that practice should be continued, then perhaps that existing wording can be added to the prototype?

Defining that sort of model could take until the heat death of the universe. 😉
However, the working group (and this community I assume) includes lots of people who implement websites (or work closely with those who do) and would object to criteria that massively increase the time/cost.

The best approach is to have well defined and available solutions to each requirement as historically defining a standard to solve problems hasn’t worked, the standard should follow the solutions.

Cheers,

-Alastair


1] https://w3c.github.io/silver/requirements/index.html#design_principles