Re: additions to the acceptance criteria

+1 to Jason's point: *"...**that the Guidelines and accompanying
non-normative materials can be reliably applied by people who do not have
significant expertise in disability or in any specific disabilities."*

What I believe Lisa is suggesting however is that we will have a large task
ahead of us explaining and teaching on these new requirements, to ensure we
successfully AND ACCURATELY see them taken up. Coordination with the
Education and Outreach WG, along with entities such as IAAP, will go a long
way in addressing the current skills and knowledge gap(s) that current web
accessibility professionals may likely have today.

For many of our new SC, education will be key to adoption. Q: does this WG
envision more coordination with EO towards this goal? Or will the
"Understanding" and other educational pieces also come from this group?

JF






On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 12:51 PM, lisa.seeman <lisa.seeman@zoho.com> wrote:

> Hi Jason
> I think you are right, I just do not want people who have not read our new
> content to be considered an expert in web accessibility and therefor new
> disabilities can never be fully included...
>
> All the best
>
> Lisa Seeman
>
> LinkedIn <http://il.linkedin.com/in/lisaseeman/>, Twitter
> <https://twitter.com/SeemanLisa>
>
>
>
>
> ---- On Tue, 17 Jan 2017 17:25:10 +0200 * White<jjwhite@ets.org
> <jjwhite@ets.org>>* wrote ----
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* lisa.seeman [mailto:lisa.seeman@zoho.com]
> *Sent:* Monday, January 16, 2017 4:07 PM
>
> I think we need to add the words " who has studied the topic involved".
> There are new disabilities being addressed and  web accessibility
> professional will need to get on top of new disabilities and how they use
> the web before they can expect to have a high degree of confidence that
> they have conformed
>
> *[Jason] While I appreciate Lisa’s point here, I think we should ensure
> that the Guidelines and accompanying non-normative materials can be
> reliably applied by people who do not have significant expertise in
> disability or in any specific disabilities. Such people are found in all
> roles (government, organizational administrators, Web content and software
> developers, etc.). I think it’s reasonable to expect them to read the
> non-normative materails for background, but not to have disability
> expertise independently of this reading.*
>
>
>
> *I don’t think I’m necessarily disagreeing with Lisa here.*
>
>
>
> Also, the central concept that we used in developing WCAG 2.0 was that of
> high inter-rater reliability – striving to design the guidelines so that
> competent evaluators would tend to agree in their judgments about
> conformance. For purposes of clarification, I hope and expect that we’re
> employing the same concept now.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or
> confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for whom
> it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this e-mail
> in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute, or
> take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and delete
> it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited.
>
> Thank you for your compliance.
> ------------------------------
>
>
>
>


-- 
John Foliot
Principal Accessibility Strategist
Deque Systems Inc.
john.foliot@deque.com

Advancing the mission of digital accessibility and inclusion