- From: <hbj@visinfo.dk>
- Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 09:27:17 +0200
- To: "'EOWG \(E-mail\)'" <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <!~!UENERkVCMDkAAQACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAAAAAAAAy0BqIDPiW0iWd3bs59uqs8KAAAAQAAAA>
FYI the comments from DSI Statement from The Danish Council of Organisations of Disabled People (DSI) to WCAG 2.0 Guidelines In general DSI would like to point out that some of the new terms and their definitions makes the language used in WCAG 2.0 difficult to understand, especially for foreigners and consequently difficult to translate into other languages. 1.1.1 Success criteria 1.1.1 is difficult to parse. When using the phrase “One of the following is true” to a criteria where several of the following can be true, if different types of non-text content are used, the criteria can be misinterpreted. DSI recommend that the phrasing of parallel logical conditions should be consistent across all success criteria. In 2.2.1 the phrase is used correctly. We mean that the success criteria of 1.1.1 should be rephrased or split up into several success criteria. 1.2 For deaf web users, there are two basic demands to be met to achieve full accessibility. - Sign Language is the native language for the deaf, the first language on which thinking and communication is based. Danish is a foreign language learnt by reading and writing. Therefore information provided in sign language will always be preferable to information provided in Danish text. (A new survey states that half of the deaf population has no School leaving exams in Danish, since they were not able to meet the language demands. Døves uddannelses- og arbejdsmarkedsforhold. Castberggaard 2006) - all information provided by sound, should also be provided visually. Sign language interpretation is mentioned in Level 3 Success Criteria for Guideline 1.2. in the WCAG 2.0 Guidelines. This placing does not ensure full accessibility to the deaf community, since EU documents only have to meet the demands on Level 2. Broadband Network (ADSL) gives new opportunities to send multimedia, and the guidelines should therefore see that these new opportunities is utilized to achieve full accessibility. Sign language interpretation should at least be a Level 2 Success Criteria. 3.1.5 Success Criteria 3.1.5: “When text requires reading ability more that the lower secondary education level, supplemental content is available…” should be placed at level 2 instead of level 3. EU and many national governments meet WCAG conformance at level 2, which means that people with cognitive disabilities will not be granted full accessibility if 3.1.5 remains on Level 3. In WCAG 1.O checkpoint 14.1 was a level 1 criteria: “Use the clearest and simplest language appropriate for a site's content”. Conformance levels According to WCAG 2.0 conformance at level Triple-A (AAA) is met when all Level 1, all Level 2 and at least 50 % of the Level 3 success criteria that apply to the content types used are met. How are the 50 % selected – randomly? We mean that it is important for WCAG to decide in advance which of the Level 3 criteria shall be met to obtain Triple-A conformance. Baseline WCAG 2.0 introduces the new term baseline in the conformance section which is difficult to understand. The introduction of the conformance section in WCAG 2.0 should be provided with a clear explanation of what a baseline is and how it should be used. If the term baseline is not understood it might be misused. Cheers Helle Helle Bjarnø Visual Impairment Knowledge Centre Rymarksvej 1, 2900 Hellerup, Denmark Phone: +45 39 46 01 01 fax: +45 39 61 94 14 e-mail hbj@visinfo.dk Direct phone: +45 39 46 01 04 www.visinfo.dk www.euroaccessibility.org
Received on Monday, 26 June 2006 07:27:35 UTC