W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-silver@w3.org > October 2019

Re: What if Silver didn't have levels?

From: Léonie Watson <lwatson@tetralogical.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2019 10:44:01 +0100
To: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>, Silver Task Force <public-silver@w3.org>
Cc: "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>
Message-ID: <3ac28a4d-ad94-218c-8624-d55d03fccbfd@tetralogical.com>
On 16/10/2019 09:44, Alastair Campbell wrote:
> Interesting thought, and I agree with some aspects like:
>    > The "good", "better", "best" model is problematic:
>    > * The levels are effectively arbitrary, and they're inconsistent depending on the nature of your disability/disabilities.
>    > What if we just used a single continuous scale, let's say for the purposes of this discussion from 0 to 100, without defining "good", "better", "best" steps along the way?
> However, I think one important role WCAG has had is setting the minimum bar at a level regulators can use. I.e. These criteria are important and we got consensus that they are feasible for everyone to tackle.
> (Noting a couple of exceptions where Canada & the EU have removed things like live captions / audio desc.)

Without disagreeing with your general point that W3C sets a benchmark 
based on consensus and feasibility, it's not clear how dependably that 
benchmark is used in practice. Noting that the information for Section 
508 is out of date, the WAI laws and policies page notes that of 40 laws 
and policies around the world, 23 are either derivatives or do not 
reference WCAG at all [2].

> With that in mind, if there is a 0 - 100 score, how about having one level?
> For sake of argument, that level could be 60%, but then scoring more looks better.
> Displayed like the Chrome Devtools where it goes green above a certain point, and people look for how to increase the points [1].
This would be an improvement over multiple levels, but it still 
perpetuates the "minimum necessary" problem.

> I still think (but haven't had time to work on this) that it would be best to start at 100 and take away points for barriers, but in either direction I think Silver should set a base level.

I like this idea a lot. What if the base level was 100, and we evaluated 
conformance in reverse - how far off base level a product is?

> It would also be important to have some guidelines (e.g. flashes) that instantly limit your score to under the level, they have to be dealt with to get to that passing level.

> Cheers,
> -Alastair
> 1] https://developers.google.com/web/tools/lighthouse/v3/scoring
[1] https://www.w3.org/WAI/policies/


Director @TetraLogical
Received on Wednesday, 16 October 2019 09:44:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:31:46 UTC