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

Re: What if Silver didn't have levels?

From: Detlev Fischer <detlev.fischer@testkreis.de>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2019 13:35:46 +0200
To: "Abma, J.D. (Jake)" <Jake.Abma@ing.com>, "public-silver@w3.org" <public-silver@w3.org>
Message-ID: <6d66f813-b649-17d5-a3b9-2a5e4c6e1806@testkreis.de>
Jake,
I agree withj sepatrate layers, "basic" and "extra on top" and critical 
issues

However (and I may be repeating myself) a result of 60%, in our old 
scoring scheme, would describe REALLY bad sites. This is because a good 
number of SCs rarely see fails (think of 1.3.3. Sensory Characteristics, 
1.3.4 Orientation, 1.4.5 Images of Text, 2.3.1 Three flashes, 2.4.5 
Multiple ways, 2.5.4 Motion Activation, 3.1.1 Language of Page, 3.2.1 On 
Focus, 3.2.2 On Input). So if bottom line of 60% means that a whooping 
40% of SCs can have defects (the queston question is of cause, *how* 
bad), that baseline would allow for pretty dismal stuff. So I fear this 
would act as a disincentive for those who are happy to just scrape 
through with minimal conformance, and really lower the bar established 
in WCAG 2.X.

I realise the structure of Silver will be different but the testable 
issues will be largely similar, in whatever arrangement nameing or 
granularity.

Am 18.10.2019 um 13:09 schrieb Abma, J.D. (Jake):
>
> Think we need some leeway here and there, but keep it very simple, like:
>
> BASICS:
>
>   * Seems like a simple / plain, 100 point with 60% baseline system,
>     might do the trick to keep it clean.
>
> EXTRA ON TOP:
>
>   * For the AAA like-ish (best practices) you could add bonus points
>     to it (clear but limited set!)
>   * And have a sort of severe/ critical issues / Non-Interference
>     musts (subtract points?! clear but limited set!)
>
> Result like:
>
>   * Basic score: 73%
>   * Bonus points: 20/100 (namely the following methods: ... and ...)
>   * Critical issues: NONE
>
> Cheers!
> Jake
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Detlev Fischer <detlev.fischer@testkreis.de>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 16, 2019 1:54 PM
> *To:* public-silver@w3.org <public-silver@w3.org>
> *Subject:* Re: What if Silver didn't have levels?
> One problem I see is that 60% (even 75%) sounds like there would already
> be MANY possibly grave accessibility issues -- when you add AAA criteria
> and best practices to such a site, these won't go away. I would imagine
> some sort of minimum conformance baseline should be set independent of
> extra things - aspects now at AAA - and I find it dubious that you would
> be able to improve one overallscore by these (possibly non-essential)
> additions.
>
> Am 16.10.2019 um 13:10 schrieb Alastair Campbell:
> > If the methods that are currently at WCAG 2.1 AA got you to 60% (for
> > example), you’d need to do things at the AAA level & best practices to
> > score higher.
>
> -- 
> Detlev Fischer
> Testkreis
> Werderstr. 34, 20144 Hamburg
>
> Mobil +49 (0)157 57 57 57 45
>
> http://www.testkreis.de
> Beratung, Tests und Schulungen für barrierefreie Websites
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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.
> -----------------------------------------------------------------

-- 
Detlev Fischer
Testkreis
Werderstr. 34, 20144 Hamburg

Mobil +49 (0)157 57 57 57 45

http://www.testkreis.de
Beratung, Tests und Schulungen für barrierefreie Websites
Received on Friday, 18 October 2019 11:35:41 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:24:03 UTC