RE: [Conformance] Third Party Draft Updated

I agree that it would make sense of WCAG 3 to encourage sites to seek accessible service providers (as in Use Case B), though I note Use Case B postulates the scouts tried to find an accessible provider but failed to find one that met their requirements.

I’m not sure where such a directive might go, I don’t think it would go in the Conformance section of WCAG 3.

Best,

Janina

From: Korn, Peter
Sent: Friday, June 18, 2021 1:06 PM
To: Sarah Horton <sarah.horton@gmail.com>; Sajka, Janina <sajkaj@amazon.com>
Cc: public-silver@w3.org; janina@sajka.net
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] [Conformance] Third Party Draft Updated

Sarah, all,

I think it makes sense for a site to offer alternatives where they exist. Depending upon the nature of the inaccessible/not fully accessible third-party service, there may not be an alternative.

Thanks,

Peter

From: Sarah Horton <sarah.horton@gmail.com<mailto:sarah.horton@gmail.com>>
Sent: Friday, June 18, 2021 9:30 AM
To: Sajka, Janina <sajkaj@amazon.com<mailto:sajkaj@amazon.com>>
Cc: public-silver@w3.org<mailto:public-silver@w3.org>; janina@sajka.net<mailto:janina@sajka.net>
Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] [Conformance] Third Party Draft Updated


CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the content is safe.


Hi, Janina.

What about requiring authors (web content publishers) to provide alternatives for inaccessible third party content? For example, in Use Case B, where the page has a statement about third-party payment processing above the embedded inaccessible author arranged service content (PaymentFriend), the statement could include details about other methods to purchase merchandise, which the authors (local scouting group) would be responsible for providing.

Thanks for all the great work on this!

Best,
Sarah


On Jun 18, 2021, at 3:55 PM, Sajka, Janina <sajkaj@amazon.com<mailto:sajkaj@amazon.com>> wrote:


Colleagues:

I believe I’ve captured the edits we agreed during our teleconference of 17 June, namely:


  *   Added to the (introductory) Problem Statement to indicate our goals in this document up top;
  *   Added Wilco’s language (and made a more definitive assertion) in the Editor’s Note at the top of the Steps to Conform section;
  *   Added a phrase to the examples in the last step of User Generated to point to outcomes (rather than further enumerating types of content prompting).
Please provide additional edits and suggestions. I will monitor here over the next few days as we prepare for our presentation Tuesday.

For convenience our draft is at:

https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Proposal_on_Third_Party_Content


Best,

Janina



----------------------------------

Janina Sajka
Accessibility Standards Consultant
sajkaj@amazon.com<mailto:sajkaj@amazon.com>