Re: What if Silver didn't have levels?

Ok, I see what you mean!

Am 18.10.2019 um 14:00 schrieb Abma, J.D. (Jake):
> Not sure if I understand you well, but 100% now will be 60% tomorrow.
>
> So the 50 SC now will be extended to 80 in near future and when 60% of 
> the 80 are passed (about 48/50/what ever we have) you barely pass.
>
> When more SC/methods are introduced you will need to catch up because 
> your 60% will drop a bit, encouraging to improve constantly in future 
> releases of the standard.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Detlev Fischer <detlev.fischer@testkreis.de>
> *Sent:* Friday, October 18, 2019 1:53 PM
> *To:* Abma, J.D. (Jake) <Jake.Abma@ing.com>; public-silver@w3.org 
> <public-silver@w3.org>
> *Subject:* Re: What if Silver didn't have levels?
> Up to now there was even talk of 'grandfathering'? WCAG 2.1 coformant 
> results so sites conforming to current level AA would meet the basic 
> level, bronze (not sure if that is still the favoured scheme though). 
> That would be meeting a 100% old SCs (I guess with minor tolerances) 
> as a baseline requirement, if I understand correctly. Lowering that to 
> 60% (whatever the rearrangements and additions coming with Silver) 
> still feels like a very significant lowering of requirements. 
> Personally I would not want to support that.
>
> Am 18.10.2019 um 13:47 schrieb Abma, J.D. (Jake):
>> (this makes the test and result a bit more complicated of course, but 
>> most people already understand a score like that)
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> *From:* Abma, J.D. (Jake) <Jake.Abma@ing.com> <mailto:Jake.Abma@ing.com>
>> *Sent:* Friday, October 18, 2019 1:45 PM
>> *To:* Detlev Fischer <detlev.fischer@testkreis.de> 
>> <mailto:detlev.fischer@testkreis.de>; public-silver@w3.org 
>> <mailto:public-silver@w3.org> <public-silver@w3.org> 
>> <mailto:public-silver@w3.org>
>> *Subject:* Re: What if Silver didn't have levels?
>> Detlev,
>>
>> True, but this may depend on where we set the 60% baseline.
>> If double A (AA) is the baseline / 60% and some AAA are part of the 
>> default scoring system, than you can increase the score more easily.
>>
>> Like touch targets and heading structure NOT AAA like but part of the 
>> defaults (and more to come...)
>> To see how this works it might be good to have concrete practical 
>> examples to talk about.
>>
>> The friction of focussing to much on 1 disability can only be solved 
>> by breaking the SC/guidelines/methods apart and judge the group to 
>> then demand a baseline score 'per group'.
>> (just like we have in our schools, you must have a 60% average for 
>> math, language, history, physics etc in order to graduate)
>>
>> Cheers!
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> *From:* Detlev Fischer <detlev.fischer@testkreis.de> 
>> <mailto:detlev.fischer@testkreis.de>
>> *Sent:* Friday, October 18, 2019 1:35 PM
>> *To:* Abma, J.D. (Jake) <Jake.Abma@ing.com> 
>> <mailto:Jake.Abma@ing.com>; public-silver@w3.org 
>> <mailto:public-silver@w3.org> <public-silver@w3.org> 
>> <mailto:public-silver@w3.org>
>> *Subject:* Re: What if Silver didn't have levels?
>> 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> 
>>> <mailto:detlev.fischer@testkreis.de>
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 16, 2019 1:54 PM
>>> *To:* public-silver@w3.org <mailto:public-silver@w3.org> 
>>> <public-silver@w3.org> <mailto: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
>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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