RE: Failures Definition (Problem?)

Ø  ​The question for this group is, ​do we really mean an alternative *version*, or do we mean an alternative *technique*?

In my opinion we need the ability to apply some alternatives without an alternative version.  For example, say I have a complex chart on my page.  Instead of making that complex chart accessible I could provide an alternative data table and text summary.  The key is that text alternatives must be on the same page and the user must be able to get to the text alternative from the content in additional any inaccessible content on the page can’t cause interference with accessing the page.

The Accessibility Support section of the Understanding Conformance document also states the following “Any information or functionality that is provided in a way that is not accessibility supported is also available in a way that is accessibility supported. (See Understanding accessibility support<http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/conformance.html#uc-accessibility-support-head>.)”

So for example, say I have a map on the page with pins of different locations.  In theory I could put a list of locations below the map with equivalent information such as miles from my current location, etc.  This alternative would be on the same page but provide an alternative to the inaccessible map.  Forcing the user to go to an alternative page to get this information would not be productive.

Jonathan

Jonathan Avila
Chief Accessibility Officer
SSB BART Group
jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com<mailto:jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com>
703.637.8957 (Office)
Visit us online: Website<http://www.ssbbartgroup.com/> | Twitter<https://twitter.com/SSBBARTGroup> | Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/ssbbartgroup> | Linkedin<https://www.linkedin.com/company/355266?trk=tyah> | Blog<http://www.ssbbartgroup.com/blog/>
Check out our Digital Accessibility Webinars!<http://www.ssbbartgroup.com/webinars/>

From: John Foliot [mailto:john.foliot@deque.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2016 4:20 AM
To: WCAG
Cc: James Craig
Subject: Failures Definition (Problem?)

Greetings colleagues,

Recently, when reviewing the "Understanding Techniques for WCAG Success Criteria" (https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/understanding-techniques.html#ut-understanding-techniques-failures-head) I noticed what I consider a potential issue with some of the language in that document, specificly the following:

"Failures are things that cause accessibility barriers and fail specific success criteria... Content that has a failure does not meet WCAG success criteria, unless an alternate version is provided without the failure."

​The question for this group is, ​do we really mean an alternative *version*, or do we mean an alternative *technique*?

In chatting with James Craig Wednesday evening at TPAC, he and I both felt that the current language could be interpreted as an open the door for the 'alternative water-fountain' (a.k.a. separate but equal - until the 2 versions get out of sync)

​Do others share this concern? Is this something we should look at addressing (either as part of the 2.1 work, or as a separate task for this WG)? (And yes, this is an 8-year-old potential editorial glitch)

Thoughts?

JF
--
John Foliot
Principal Accessibility Strategist
Deque Systems Inc.
john.foliot@deque.com<mailto:john.foliot@deque.com>

Advancing the mission of digital accessibility and inclusion