Re: Proposal for moving COGA SC forward

Neil,
If that CFC fails then we won’t be doing this, but it doesn’t seem likely that will be the outcome.

Thanks,
AWK

Andrew Kirkpatrick
Group Product Manager, Accessibility
Adobe

akirkpat@adobe.com
http://twitter.com/awkawk


From: Neil Milliken <neil.milliken@atos.net<mailto:neil.milliken@atos.net>>
Date: Wednesday, May 24, 2017 at 11:44
To: Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com<mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com>>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
Subject: RE: Proposal for moving COGA SC forward

Hi Andrew,

How does this sit with the CFC for the supplement?

Kind regards,

Neil Milliken
Head of Accessibility & Digital Inclusion
Atos
T: +442036180957
M: 07812325386<tel:07812325386>
E: Neil.Milliken@atos.net<mailto:Neil.Milliken@atos.net>
www:http://atos.net/iux<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fatos.net%2Fiux&data=02%7C01%7C%7C04d7d1cbbd644b10451f08d4a2bbd73d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636312375043012575&sdata=fB994iOgZWU8zzIC570GbBPsm8MI3CLVFyDFXTxccKU%3D&reserved=0>
Twitter:@neilmilliken<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fneilmilliken&data=02%7C01%7C%7C04d7d1cbbd644b10451f08d4a2bbd73d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636312375043012575&sdata=0q26qoFu%2FBqQA7TaIdf863xJpSNbgREo8MJ7QBqwLts%3D&reserved=0>
Assistant Monika Tomczak
E: Monika.Tomczak@atos.net<mailto:Monika.Tomczak@atos.net>
M: +48517727304


From: Andrew Kirkpatrick [mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2017 4:19 PM
To: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
Subject: Proposal for moving COGA SC forward

We’ve been talking about ways to encourage the inclusion of success criteria that benefit users with cognitive or learning disabilities in WCAG 2.1.  The SC proposed by COGA are not going to all make it into WCAG 2.1 due to a variety of concerns ranging from testability to lack of working group time to discuss all proposals. Unfortunately for end users with disabilities, all of the SC proposed are designed to address real problems faced by some users and without the SC being incorporated into WCAG 2.1 the users are likely to continue to face barriers.

Of course, this is also true for low-vision and mobile SC proposals, but the issue is more acute for COGA as the SC proposals are much more numerous and we want to help strategize on how to focus the efforts of the group on a smaller set of COGA SC. With the supplementary guidance document, we will be able to provide additional best practice-level suggestions to improve access for users with cognitive disabilities, but we still want to have a core set of items in WCAG 2.1.

We are thinking about defining a set of "pillars of cognitive accessibility" in WCAG 2.1 and then expanding on them in the supplemental guidance. The pillars would likely be based on ideas from the COGA Roadmap and Gap Analysis document (https://rawgit.com/w3c/coga/master/gap-analysis/#roadmap---tables-of-user-needs<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Frawgit.com%2Fw3c%2Fcoga%2Fmaster%2Fgap-analysis%2F%23roadmap---tables-of-user-needs&data=02%7C01%7C%7C04d7d1cbbd644b10451f08d4a2bbd73d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636312375043022582&sdata=bfrqAxHBQ5zqJfNo%2B6izHu3Qs8VdW6zVL4SWM2YHYEo%3D&reserved=0>) and would provide a structure for 6-8 WCAG 2.1 SC and the additional guidance within the supplementary document would follow the same pattern.

This will require some additional work on the part of the COGA TF and from this group as the current proposals may not fit precisely with the pillars. We would be looking to draw from the SC proposals made earlier but only include parts that directly relate to the applicable pillar and that we think can pass the WG consensus process. Remaining concepts from the SC proposals would be targeted for inclusion in the supplemental guidance document.

We wanted to see if the WG thinks this approach could work and would support us in making sure we can increase the chance that we have a good core of improvements for COGA in WCAG 2.1. Please let us know if you have any thoughts or concerns.

Thanks,
AWK

Andrew Kirkpatrick
Group Product Manager, Accessibility
Adobe

akirkpat@adobe.com<mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com>
http://twitter.com/awkawk<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fawkawk&data=02%7C01%7C%7C04d7d1cbbd644b10451f08d4a2bbd73d%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636312375043022582&sdata=ZSEkRPhNQctG7HUygwaasADH2Ij2a2l1meEQLj%2B9iTY%3D&reserved=0>
Atos, Atos Consulting, Worldline and Canopy The Open Cloud Company are trading names used by the Atos group. The following trading entities are registered in England and Wales: Atos IT Services UK Limited (registered number 01245534), Atos Consulting Limited (registered number 04312380), Atos Worldline UK Limited (registered number 08514184) and Canopy The Open Cloud Company Limited (registration number 08011902). The registered office for each is at 4 Triton Square, Regent’s Place, London, NW1 3HG.The VAT No. for each is: GB232327983.

This e-mail and the documents attached are confidential and intended solely for the addressee, and may contain confidential or privileged information. If you receive this e-mail in error, you are not authorised to copy, disclose, use or retain it. Please notify the sender immediately and delete this email from your systems. As emails may be intercepted, amended or lost, they are not secure. Atos therefore can accept no liability for any errors or their content. Although Atos endeavours to maintain a virus-free network, we do not warrant that this transmission is virus-free and can accept no liability for any damages resulting from any virus transmitted. The risks are deemed to be accepted by everyone who communicates with Atos by email.