Numbering Scheme for WCAG 2.1

Greetings All,

 

Roughly 3 weeks ago, we began discussing possible numbering solutions for WCAG 2.1. As part of that effort, we also created a wiki page at: https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/WCAG_2.1_SC_Numbering

 

The activity generated a moderate amount of feedback, as well as some emails: https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2016AprJun/

 

Some takeaways from the discussion (at least from what I perceived) were:

 

*        Continue to follow the same basic pattern as WCAG 2.0 (to maximize backward compatibility) SC that start 1.x.x are from the Perceivable principle, 2.x.x from Operable, 3.x.x = Understandable, and 4.x.x = Robust

*        There appeared to be a preference for adding new Success Criteria numerically *after* the current collection

*        There was some discussion over ranking Success Criteria in a “master list” by severity level – i.e. display all A’s first, then AQA’s, and then AAA’s – although there was some negative pushback on having a list that numerically was out of numerical order (in other words, the numerical listing saw a greater preference than a listing based on severity)

*        Filtering of Success Criteria and severity levels should be left to tools and systems (ref: the Quickref Guide developed by the EOWG)

*        My overall sense was that (Model 2) Add a new section to the end of each existing Guideline that will have new SCs <https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/WCAG_2.1_SC_Numbering#.28Model_2.29_Add_a_new_section_to_the_end_of_each_existing_Guideline_that_will_have_new_SCs>  with some modification drew the most positive responses

 

One item that did not receive a lot of discussion, but has surfaced on some of the Task Force lists, is what to do with existing Success Criteria that will need to be modified in some fashion in WCAG 2.1. There are concerns over WCAG 2.1 being seen as “too big”, as well as a concern over ‘repeating’ requirements based upon conditional statements (see the thread at the Mobile TF list). 

 

We were also provided some extremely useful feedback on how US-based legislations traditionally handle evolutions to laws and statutes, and I personally believe we can draw some useful insights from that information.

 

Based upon all of this, and pending further discussion on Tuesday’s WCAG call, I would like to propose the following model as the one that appeared to draw the most support (Model #2), with modification s based upon the “legislation” model feedback. 
   (Please note that the use of  (*new) in this email is only to address the visual formatting used in this email in some instances, but would not be part of the numbering scheme)

 

3.1 Readable

  3.1.1 Language of Page A

  3.1.2 Language of Parts AA

  3.1.3 Unusual Words AAA

  3.1.4 Abbreviations AAA

  3.1.5 Reading Level AAA

  3.1.6 Pronunciation AAA

  3.1.7 New COGA AA (*new)

  3.1.8 New Mobile A (*new)

  3.1.9 New COGA AA (*new)

 

Plus…

 

   1.2.2 Captions (Prerecorded): Captions are provided for all prerecorded audio ... (Level A)

   1.2.3 Audio Description or Media Alternative (Prerecorded): ... (Level A)

        1.2.3A Some new SC that is related to this concept, but distinct (Level AA) (*new)

        1.2.3B Another new SC that is related but distinct (Level AA) (*new)

   1.2.4 Captions (Live): Captions are provided for all live audio content ... (Level AA)

 

…with the suggestion that this type of numbering scheme would be extremely useful for the Mobile work, where many of the existing Success Criteria are close, but not quite enough for mobile requirements.

 

I look forward to further discussing this on the call Tuesday, and to finalize this next important step in the WCAG 2.1 journey.

 

JF

​-- 

John Foliot

Principal Accessibility Strategist

Austin, TX

 

Deque Systems Inc.
2121 Cooperative Way, Suite 210,  
Herndon, VA 20171-5344

Office: 703-225-0380 

 <mailto:john.foliot@deque.com> john.foliot@deque.com

 

Advancing the mission of digital accessibility and inclusion