RE: Design Principle 9 - The Sequel ...

One minor mod:

 

"...valid data-gathering methods can be used to obtain and evaluate information from advocacy groups, people with lived experience and other subject matter experts. We aim for and encourage research that is rigorous and SEEK TO INCLUDE INPUT FROM THOSE AT THE EDGES OF DIFFERENT DISABILITY GROUPS, AND NOT JUST THE NEEDS OF THE MAJORITY."

 

I changed “SEEKS” to “SEEK”.

 

Chuck

 

From: John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com> 
Sent: Tuesday, April 30, 2019 10:47 AM
To: Silver TF <public-silver@w3.org>
Cc: Jeanne Spellman <jspellman@spellmanconsulting.com>
Subject: Re: Design Principle 9 - The Sequel ...

 

How about:

"...valid data-gathering methods can be used to obtain and evaluate information from advocacy groups, people with lived experience and other subject matter experts. We aim for and encourage research that is rigorous and SEEKS TO INCLUDE INPUT FROM THOSE AT THE EDGES OF DIFFERENT DISABILITY GROUPS, AND NOT JUST THE NEEDS OF THE MAJORITY."

 

**************

 

Additionally, while I support the intent of this statement, it also needs to be balanced to a certain extent with pragmatism - a certain amount of generalization is required in our Recommendation if we expect to see wide-spread adoption. 

 

When WCAG 2.0 was being crafted, the A, AA, AAA determinations were arrived at NOT just based upon the impact to the user, but also on the impact to the content creator (in terms of complexity, cost of delivery, and other concerns related to the "undue burden" clause of some legislation requirements). 

 

That's why (for example) captions in WCAG 2.0 for prerecorded content is at Level A (SC 1.2.2), yet captions on live material is at level AA (SC 1.2.4): the need is identical from the user-perspective, but the complexity of delivery from the content creator end is greater in the live scenario.

 

JF

 

 

On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 10:07 AM Jeanne Spellman <HYPERLINK "mailto:jspellman@spellmanconsulting.com"jspellman@spellmanconsulting.com> wrote:

Proposal from Cyborg (changes in CAPS):

Be data-informed and evidence-based where possible. We recognize that 
research and evidence are influenced by the number of people with a 
particular disability, by the size of the body of research, and the 
difficulty in capturing data regarding some disabilities. The intent is 
to make informed decisions wherever possible to ensure that needs of all 
people with disabilities will be prioritized equally. In situations 
where there is no evidence or research, valid data-gathering methods can 
be used to obtain AND EVALUATE information from advocacy groups, people 
with lived experience and other subject matter experts.  WE AIM FOR AND 
ENCOURAGE RESEARCH THAT IS RIGOROUS AND INCLUDES THOSE AT THE EDGES, 
RATHER THAN ONLY ADDRESSING THE NEEDS OF THE MAJORITY.




 

-- 

​John Foliot | Principal Accessibility Strategist | W3C AC Representative
Deque Systems - Accessibility for Good
HYPERLINK "https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__deque.com_&d=DwMFaQ&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PZh8Bv7qIrMUB65eapI_JnE&r=b-9TIC95K-nLEKIDibNXAN_FKV-iXhLlAW2Zc3ebV_c&m=YJrmenZ9FxJycAqm3-khj21RDJpBR1ym7kZym25OUpg&s=fvPmVW9t5YIbGFsHl-hcUgMTvO1j7KA45OL-KEvTm_g&e="deque.com