RE: Is it 2 or 3 years that WCAG will be updated? - I thought it was approx. 3

JF: If the priority of constituents has changed since the publishing of WCAG 2.0, and the current information posted on the Intro page is now inaccurate, I'd like to know when that happened (Meeting minutes, CfC, etc.), or, conversely, do we need to review that point as part of our going forward? 

 

John,

 

The question raised in today’s meeting as I recall wasn’t ‘who is WCAG for’, but was not a question at all, but rather a response to you saying that WCAG wasn’t written for governments – to which I responded…… 

 

My memory is very clear on this, and certainly much of the meeting minutes from early on in WCAG 2 development should confirm, and perhaps my colleagues from that time, that since WCAG 1 was (surprisingly to many) adopted by laws around the world, the WG decided for WCAG 2 to specifically frame the SC language to be testable and articulated so as to allow them to be more easily included in design specifications, purchasing agreements (procurement), regulations (government), and contractual agreements.

 

If you look at WCAG 2 itself, under the WCAG 2.0 Layers of Guidance heading: 

 

​​​​​“Success Criteria - For each guideline, testable success criteria are provided to allow WCAG 2.0 to be used where requirements and conformance testing are necessary such as in design specification, purchasing, regulation, and contractual agreements.” 

 

Of course WCAG 2 guidance was made for developers, designers and others - for the benefit of the true constituents, *users with disabilities*. The crux though, is, that if those new SC aren’t adopted and required by governement in their regulations – than few users will benefit from those important new SC – because they won’t be implmented other than by a few accessibility companies, disability groups and other well-meaning organizations building mobile apps. 

 

Beleiveing that new SC will be taken-up by most organizations, public and private, without them being required to do so by law, is pretty much wishful thinking. As much as some would like to believe that they live in a society that is enlightened, above accessibility needing to be mandated by law, I wish them the best – I do not live in that world.

 

In my experience, with almost all clients, as I sit across the table from them after an assessment or requirements meeting, what I hear from them is “What do I *have* to do”? The shoulds and the coulds rarely get the go-ahead. 

 

* katie *

 

Katie Haritos-Shea 
Principal ICT Accessibility Architect (WCAG/Section 508/ADA/AODA)

 

Cell: 703-371-5545 |  <mailto:ryladog@gmail.com> ryladog@gmail.com | Oakton, VA |  <http://www.linkedin.com/in/katieharitosshea/> LinkedIn Profile | Office: 703-371-5545 |  <https://twitter.com/Ryladog> @ryladog

 

From: John Foliot [mailto:john.foliot@deque.com] 
Sent: Monday, November 7, 2016 5:41 PM
To: Katie Haritos-Shea GMAIL <ryladog@gmail.com>
Cc: Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>; WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>; Joshue O Connor <josh@interaccess.ie>
Subject: Re: Is it 2 or 3 years that WCAG will be updated? - I thought it was approx. 3

 

​​+1 to Andrew. 

 

The deck I used for the internal Deque presentation today was dated September 30th and was first presented at Paris-Web on that day, and was based on thoughts & discussions that emerged from TPAC 2016 the week previous. Some aspects of that have changed since then, however the goal of getting WCAG 2.1 completed in a 2-year time frame (closer to 15-18 months), and that a FPWD of Silver (AG/3.0) is targeted for 3 years is now part of our Draft Charter out for review to the AC. Additionally, all dates in the PPT deck were also clearly marked TBC.

 

The current Draft Charter for this Working Group now has an indicated release date of Q2 (June) 2018 for WCAG 2.1 (https://www.w3.org/2016/11/proposed-ag-charter#milestones), and personally I have a high-level expectation that this date will not slip FOR ANY REASON. (I suspect that will also be an expectation from W3C management and AC representatives.)

 

Because of that, I also suspect that not all of the currently proposed 50+ new Success Criteria emerging from the various task forces will make that date. Despite my continued reservations that this scenario is currently not explicitly addressed in the proposed new WG charter, I agreed (or rather "agreed to live with") to let the charter move forward for AC review, with the understanding that we may need a WCAG 2.2, likely to ship during the *next* charter (after the currently proposed new 3 year charter expires) to address current proposed SC that did not make the cut-off date for WCAG 2.1. Whether that would be in a 1, 2 or 3 year time-frame after the 2016-2019 charter period expires has been left to determine during the next rechartering exercise. That decision will also likely be impacted and informed by progress made on the Silver activity (i.e. if progress on Silver is moving forward rapidly, we may not need a 2.2, and instead go straight to 3.0/Silver).

 

 

Another question that surfaced during that internal presentation today was "Who is WCAG for?", to which I referenced the following:


Who WCAG is for


WCAG is primarily intended for:

* Web content developers (page authors, site designers, etc.)
* Web authoring tool developers
* Web accessibility evaluation tool developers
* Others who want or need a standard for web accessibility

Related resources are intended to meet the needs of many different people, including policy makers, managers, researchers, and others.

WCAG is a technical standard, not an introduction to accessibility. For introductory material, see  <http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/wcag2faq.html#start> Where should I start? in the FAQ.

(source: https://www.w3.org/WAI/intro/wcag.php)

 

While the role of governments and legislators is noted in the "constituents group" above (policy makers), I also wanted to note their secondary role, and to underscore that WCAG is primarily for the users and content creators (per our own documentation), and that we should be working to their needs over those of the regulators, including developing time-lines and delivery deadlines, especially with the 2.x work. If the priority of constituents has changed since the publishing of WCAG 2.0, and the current information posted on the Intro page is now inaccurate, I'd like to know when that happened (Meeting minutes, CfC, etc.), or, conversely, do we need to review that point as part of our going forward? 

 

<opinion>

I do believe that a deeper consultation with all stakeholders is appropriate for the AG (aka 3.0) work, and in fact is called out explicitly in the Silver draft Work Statement, but I again reiterate that from my perspective, work on the 2.x activity should not and in fact must not be delayed by policy makers (etc.) not being actively involved in the 2.x work and slowing our progress. 

 

We need to work at the speed of the internet, not the speed of regulators, to get accurate, useful, and standardized Success Criteria into the hands of those who *want* this content today: I already know of at least one organization that is legally mandated to meet the BBC Mobile Accessibility Guidelines, not because they didn't want to use WCAG Guidelines, but because WCAG has nothing today specific to Mobile, and they needed something now, not in 5 years time. This is another problem we must also recognize: if we take too long to update our guidance, our Recommendation will start to lose credibility and relevance to the real world, in much the same way that Section 508 today is irrelevant to most content producers "in the wild": even the US Department of Justice references WCAG 2.0 over Section 508, and through my work I note other 508-mandated stakeholders are today driving toward WCAG 2.0 instead - I heard this multiple times at Educause 2 weeks ago, with multiple publicly funded EDUs adopting WCAG 2.0 as their internal standard.

 

(I'll also note in passing that this could negatively impact this Working Group's very existence: during the last rechartering of the Education and Outreach Working Group, more than one AC representative noted that they felt the work of EO was being duplicated elsewhere: faster, and "better", and why should the W3C continue to fund that activity? That hurdle was cleared, and EO lives still, but there is a cautionary tale there that should not be ignored... UAAG WG was also wrapped up for similar reasons.)

 

Those that are going to take their time adopting our new work, and/or push back on each and every new SC as being difficult for regulators must not stop us in this goal - they can stay conformant to WCAG 2.0 from now to eternity (as WCAG 2.0 will never change), and instead make their legislative shift to 3.0 when it is ready to be published as a W3C Recommendation, and they are ready to adopt it - there is no obligation, implied or stated, that governments and legislators *MUST* keep up with all WCAG releases, whether major or minor.

</opinion>

 

JF

 

On Mon, Nov 7, 2016 at 4:00 PM, Katie Haritos-Shea GMAIL <ryladog@gmail.com <mailto:ryladog@gmail.com> > wrote:

Andrew,

 

Thanks. That is what I thought!

 

​​​​​Happy Monday.

 

 

 

* katie *

 

Katie Haritos-Shea 
Principal ICT Accessibility Architect (WCAG/Section 508/ADA/AODA)

 

Cell: 703-371-5545 <tel:703-371-5545>  |  <mailto:ryladog@gmail.com> ryladog@gmail.com | Oakton, VA |  <http://www.linkedin.com/in/katieharitosshea/> LinkedIn Profile | Office: 703-371-5545 <tel:703-371-5545>  |  <https://twitter.com/Ryladog> @ryladog

 

From: Andrew Kirkpatrick [mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com <mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com> ] 
Sent: Monday, November 7, 2016 3:26 PM
To: Katie Haritos-Shea GMAIL <ryladog@gmail.com <mailto:ryladog@gmail.com> >; 'WCAG' <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org <mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org> >; josh@interaccess.ie <mailto:josh@interaccess.ie> 
Subject: Re: Is it 2 or 3 years that WCAG will be updated? - I thought it was approx. 3

 

As of right now we say in the proposed charter "The Working Group intends to produce updated guidance for accessibility on a regular interval of approximately three years, starting with WCAG 2.1.”

 

We may determine that we can do it in 2 or we may determine that we need 4, or we may find that 2 is too soon or that 3 is too long. It is currently TBD, as there is not a consensus opinion on the group for 2 years at this point in time.

 

Thanks,

AWK

 

Andrew Kirkpatrick

Group Product Manager, Standards and Accessibility

Adobe 

 

akirkpat@adobe.com <mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com> 

http://twitter.com/awkawk

 

From: Katie GMAIL <ryladog@gmail.com <mailto:ryladog@gmail.com> >
Date: Monday, November 7, 2016 at 15:17
To: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org <mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org> >, Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com <mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com> >, "josh@interaccess.ie <mailto:josh@interaccess.ie> " <josh@interaccess.ie <mailto:josh@interaccess.ie> >
Subject: Is it 2 or 3 years that WCAG will be updated? - I thought it was approx. 3

 

Andrew and Josh,

 

I was at a presentation today put on by John Foliot, where he stated that we, the WCAG Working Group, will be updating WCAG 2 every two years until Silver comes out. 

 

Is there some background information about how often *we* plan on updating WCAG 2, as was stated in the charter, that I am missing? 

 

​​​​​

 

 

 

* katie *

 

Katie Haritos-Shea
Principal ICT Accessibility Architect (WCAG/Section 508/ADA/AODA)

 

Cell: 703-371-5545 <tel:703-371-5545>  |ryladog@gmail.com <mailto:ryladog@gmail.com> |Oakton, VA |LinkedIn Profile <http://www.linkedin.com/in/katieharitosshea/> |Office: 703-371-5545 <tel:703-371-5545>  |@ryladog <https://twitter.com/Ryladog> 

 





 

-- 

John Foliot

Principal Accessibility Strategist

Deque Systems Inc.

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

 

Advancing the mission of digital accessibility and inclusion