RE: Can Silver have normative technology specific requirements?

First a short remark / question:


-          “It had 4 layers, 3 layers were normative (Principles, Guidelines, Success criteria) an one layer (technology specific techniques) that were non normative.  “

Are the SC not the only normative aspect of WCAG, not the Principles and Guidelines?



-          “The WCAG 2.0, 12 guidelines would expand in their role and become general guidelines under which these methods could be grouped.”

We had to make multiple decisions on to where a SC should live, under which specific Guideline. Also we have techniques under multiple SC. So I guess you don’t mean here to group methods under a specific guideline, but tag the methods with whatever guidelines we will have?


-          “Making methods normative…”

This means each method will become a “sufficient method” for one or more guidelines? And which ones exactly if there are more? And we don’t need to conform to all methods because you don’t need to  / can’t follow them all? Or have a solution which may not be a method (yet) but solves the A11Y problem. But all guidelines must be fulfilled while not being normative?

Just as Wilco mentioned I see we will never be “complete” in methods and leave room for other / new / innovative solutions to make them normative and not the guidelines.

David, maybe I read it wrong and you’ve thought about it already than I would love to hear from you what your ideas are. Will it be possible to provide a concrete example on your thoughts?

Cheers!
Jake

From: David MacDonald [mailto:david100@sympatico.ca]
Sent: vrijdag 23 november 2018 3:02
To: Silver Task Force <public-silver@w3.org>; Wilco Fiers <wilco.fiers@deque.com>; Hall, Charles (DET-MRM) <Charles.Hall@mrm-mccann.com>
Subject: Re: Can Silver have normative technology specific requirements?

Wilco asks:

> Yes, technology specific measurable methods would be fantastic, but it is very resource intensive to develop
and maintain them. ...

David responds:

We could have say, 5 technology specific methods and then a sixth
method could look like a technology agnostic WCAG 2 SC to cover any outlier
situations.

Most authors will ignore the last cryptic technology agnostic (General)
method and follow the easy to understand technology specific methods.

In other words, it needn't be more intensive as they are now. Provide the methods we have  for a guideline and add a general method at the end that they can meet in their own way.




Cheers,
David MacDonald



CanAdapt Solutions Inc.

Tel:  613-806-9005

LinkedIn
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>

twitter.com/davidmacd<http://twitter.com/davidmacd>

GitHub<https://github.com/DavidMacDonald>

www.Can-Adapt.com<http://www.can-adapt.com/>



  Adapting the web to all users
            Including those with disabilities

If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy<http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html>


On Thu, Nov 22, 2018 at 8:56 PM David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca<mailto:david100@sympatico.ca>> wrote:
Charles says:
My hope for Silver is that it is as technology agnostic as possible – regardless of what section of a document or whether it is normative or informative. The guideline is to support people.

David responds:
I understand that Silver is moving toward non-testable/non-measurable Guidelines with things like "“no digital content should be restricted by a specific viewing context” and the measurability being at the method level. If you are proposing the methods also be technologically agnostic and that no technology specific requirements are in SIlver, then it sounds like we're back to separate non normative technology specific techniques hanging off those methods, which sounds a lot like WCAG 2.0. Unless you are saying "lets just omit techniques for HTML, PDF etc. and hand them technology neutral statements and let them figure it out for themselves in their technology."



Cheers,
David MacDonald



CanAdapt Solutions Inc.

Tel:  613-806-9005

LinkedIn
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>

twitter.com/davidmacd<http://twitter.com/davidmacd>

GitHub<https://github.com/DavidMacDonald>

www.Can-Adapt.com<http://www.can-adapt.com/>



  Adapting the web to all users
            Including those with disabilities

If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy<http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html>

-----------------------------------------------------------------
ATTENTION:
The information in this e-mail is confidential and only meant for the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, don't use or disclose it in any way. Please let the sender know and delete the message immediately.
-----------------------------------------------------------------