W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-silver@w3.org > November 2020

Re: [{TBD} Conformance] Minutes for 19 November

From: Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 20:30:09 -0500
To: Frederick Boland <replymehere447@gmail.com>, Silver Task Force <public-silver@w3.org>, Wilco Fiers <wilco.fiers@deque.com>
Message-ID: <5cbe7ca3-ca67-4601-3461-a6e40407dbd3@w3.org>
Hi Tim,

I'm not sure whether the relevant question here is whether or not 
"substantial" is a legal term or not. In seeking a name that best 
conveys the work that has been done to define and propose a conformance 
model for next generation guidelines, I think we also need to think 
about what a proposed term conveys from a messaging perspective.

With "substantial conformance" I'd be concerned that it gives more of an 
impression of additive conformance from a low bar, along the lines of 
"you can use a lot of parts of this website," or "you can use what we 
think are the important parts of this website," or "a lot of this site 
conforms to WCAG." I'd be concerned that it would be hard to overcome 
that impression even if backed by strong and precise testing criteria, 
and that this would impact people's expectations of the accessibility 
conformance model.

It may turn out to be that there is no term that sets a clearer 
expectation. Or, it may turn out that the initial impression some people 
have that the term sets a low bar for accessibility is not a common 
perspective. But I'd like us to explore some other naming possibilities 
before confirming a term that might give a potentially fraught impression.

- Judy

On 11/19/2020 6:38 PM, Frederick Boland wrote:
> “Substantial” is a legal term – from FindLaw Legal Dictionary –
> 1a : of or relating to substance, b : not illusory : having merit 
> [failed to raise a constitutional claim], c : having importance or 
> significance : material [a step had not been taken towards commission 
> of the crime “W.R. LaFave and A.W. Scott Jr”]
> 2. : considerable in quantity : significantly great [would be a abuse 
> of the provisions of this chapter “U.S. Code”] compare de minimis
> Source: Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of Law 1996
> Also, I found an interesting article about measuring “substantially 
> similar”:
> https://www.novoco.com/notes-from-novogradac/close-enough-how-measure-substantially-similar-under-fasbs-new-lihtc-investment-guidance
> Although in a different subject area, might provide some insight, even 
> if the term “substantial” is not kept..
> On Thursday, November 19, 2020, 1:09:54 PM EST, Wilco Fiers 
> <wilco.fiers@deque.com> wrote:
> Minutes from the [TBD] Conformance Silver subgroup teleconference:
> https://www.w3.org/2020/11/19-silver-conf-minutes.html
> Summary:
> - Discussed where/how to remove the phrase "substantial conformance"
> - Discussed principle 6, on numbers of bugs per website
> -- 
> *Wilco Fiers*
> Axe-core product owner - Co-facilitator WCAG-ACT - Chair ACT-R
> Join me at axe-con <http://deque.com/axe-con>2021: a free digital 
> accessibility conference.

Judy Brewer
Director, Web Accessibility Initiative
at the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
105 Broadway, Room 7-128, MIT/CSAIL
Cambridge MA 02142 USA
Received on Friday, 20 November 2020 01:30:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 20 November 2020 01:30:22 UTC