Proposal on the use of "accessible content" within ATAG 2.0

Hi all,

Below is a multi-part proposal that I hope will address the concerns of the WCAG-WG, which are echoed by the Canadian Government "Web Standards Office" (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-atag2-comments/2011Sep/0000.html)

PART 1: Re-word the existing Note #2 in the Introduction:
-----
3. The term "accessible content" (and related terms, such as "accessible template") is used by ATAG 2.0 to refer to "content that would conform to WCAG 2.0, at either Level A, AA, or AAA, assuming that any web content technologies relied upon to satisfy the WCAG 2.0 success criteria are accessibility supported. The definition of the term echoes the WCAG 2.0 note that even content that conforms to the highest level of WCAG 2.0 (i.e., Level AAA) may not be "accessible to individuals with all types, degrees, or combinations of disability". For more information, see "Relationship to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0".


PART 2: Re-word the first 3 paragraphs of the existing Conformance: "Relationship to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0"
-----
At the time of publishing, WCAG 2.0 [WCAG20] is the current W3C Recommendation regarding web content accessibility. For this reason, it is natural for ATAG 2.0 to refer to WCAG 2.0 when setting requirements for (1) the accessibility of web-based authoring tool user interfaces (in Part A) and (2) how authors should be enabled, supported, and guided toward producing web content that is accessible to end users with disabilities (in Part B).

In particular, ATAG 2.0 refers to WCAG 2.0 within its definition of the term "accessible content" (and related terms, such as "accessible template"). The definition of "accessible content" is content that would conform to WCAG 2.0, at either Level A, AA, or AAA, under the assumption that any web content technologies that are relied upon to satisfy the WCAG 2.0 success criteria are accessibility supported. The phrase "at either Level A, AA, or AAA" takes into account that the definition of "accessible content" can differ depending on the context of use (e.g. in a Level A success criterion of ATAG 2.0 versus in a Level AAA success criterion)
The definition also includes two notes:
- The first is "[i]f accessibility support for the relied upon technologies is, in fact, lacking, then the content will not conform to WCAG 2.0 and one or more groups of end-users with disabilities will likely experience difficulty accessing the content."
- The second is "[c]onformance to WCAG 2.0, even at the highest level (i.e., Level AAA), still may not make content 'accessible to individuals with all types, degrees, or combinations of disability'."

In order to highlight success criteria or defined terms in ATAG 2.0 that depend on WCAG 2.0, they are marked with the parenthetical: "(WCAG)".



PART 2: Re-word the following existing definitions in the glossary:
-----

Accessible Content:
Content that would conform to WCAG 2.0, at either Level A, AA, or AAA, assuming that any web content technologies relied upon to satisfy the WCAG 2.0 success criteria are accessibility supported.
Note 1: If accessibility support for the relied upon technologies is, in fact, lacking, then the content will not conform to WCAG 2.0 and one or more groups of end-users with disabilities will likely experience difficulty accessing the content.
Note 2: Conformance to WCAG 2.0, even at the highest level (i.e., Level AAA), still may not make content "accessible to individuals with all types, degrees, or combinations of disability".


Cheers,
Jan


(MR) JAN RICHARDS
PROJECT MANAGER
INCLUSIVE DESIGN RESEARCH CENTRE (IDRC)

T 416 977 6000 x3957
F 416 977 9844
E jrichards@ocadu.ca

Twitter @OCAD
Facebook www.facebook.com/OCADUniversity 

OCAD UNIVERSITY
205 Richmond Street West, 2nd Floor, Toronto, Canada  M5V 1V3
www.ocadu.ca
idrc.ocadu.ca

Received on Monday, 23 January 2012 17:48:18 UTC