- From: Jeanne Spellman <jspellman@spellmanconsulting.com>
- Date: Fri, 22 May 2020 18:24:20 -0400
- To: John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com>
- Cc: Silver TF <public-silver@w3.org>
On 5/22/2020 4:17 PM, John Foliot wrote: > My point however is that we've publicly decided to use a "Score" based > measurement system, and that scoring mechanism needs to work for both > short-term (development time) and longer-term reporting metrics. I disagree with your assertion that it has to work with longer term reporting metrics. I see longer-term reporting metrics as an accessibility tool feature, not conformance. The purpose of a "score" based system is to give owners and authors a better idea of how well they conform. That is a change from WCAG 2.1 that was well documented in the Silver Research. What we are currently proposing is that the score conforms for that moment for which they are claiming conformance -- which is not a change from current WCAG 2.1 conformance. What you are asserting is a big change from WCAG 2. I would like to see the research for why longer-term metrics belongs in a W3C standard. If so, I'm willing to change my mind about doing it. I fully expect that different tools will use the WCAG3 scoring and then add their own value-add of long term performance improvement, dashboards, priorities for remediation, etc. -- or not. Some tools may choose to stay aligned with VPAT and adapt the WCAG3 guidelines to VPAT reporting. Long-term reporting metrics does not need to be standardized, in my opinion. I think it is better left as a feature of accessibility tools.
Received on Friday, 22 May 2020 22:24:36 UTC