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

Re: What if Silver didn't have levels?

From: Shawn Lauriat <lauriat@google.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2019 10:48:56 -0400
Message-ID: <CAGQw2h=TcTE7QXotNPvLAyh3bh0ske+Ci5dqPZ42iWjtrzRLyw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Detlev Fischer <detlev.fischer@testkreis.de>
Cc: "Abma, J.D. (Jake)" <Jake.Abma@ing.com>, "public-silver@w3.org" <public-silver@w3.org>
That 60% number came from Alastair writing "For sake of argument, that
level could be 60%…" so we definitely shouldn't take that as a solid
proposal that WCAG 2.x AA means 60% passing in Silver. Having a number just
made it so that we could work through the other aspects of this
conversation, which I've personally found really helpful!

Detlev & Makoto, the examples you each gave for ways of adding to WCAG's
conformance in order to better express granularity of accessibility beyond
yes/no and A/AA/AAA seem particularly helpful to reference and think about.

Thanks,

Shawn

On Fri, Oct 18, 2019 at 8:08 AM Detlev Fischer <detlev.fischer@testkreis.de>
wrote:

> 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>
> <detlev.fischer@testkreis.de>
> *Sent:* Friday, October 18, 2019 1:53 PM
> *To:* Abma, J.D. (Jake) <Jake.Abma@ing.com> <Jake.Abma@ing.com>;
> public-silver@w3.org <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> <Jake.Abma@ing.com>
> *Sent:* Friday, October 18, 2019 1:45 PM
> *To:* Detlev Fischer <detlev.fischer@testkreis.de>
> <detlev.fischer@testkreis.de>; public-silver@w3.org <public-silver@w3.org>
> <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>
> <detlev.fischer@testkreis.de>
> *Sent:* Friday, October 18, 2019 1:35 PM
> *To:* Abma, J.D. (Jake) <Jake.Abma@ing.com> <Jake.Abma@ing.com>;
> public-silver@w3.org <public-silver@w3.org> <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>
> <detlev.fischer@testkreis.de>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 16, 2019 1:54 PM
> *To:* public-silver@w3.org <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
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
>
>
Received on Friday, 18 October 2019 14:49:12 UTC

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