RE: Abstract update - new content terms

-1

I agree with Kim.  Policy is a complex issue, that often involves legal and regulatory compliance.  Organizations will need to consider a broad range of factors in determining how to best determine their accessibility policies.  There’s no need, in my opinion, to include the sentence that reads “The W3C also advises that new or updated Web accessibility policies reference WCAG 2.1.”

Brooks

From: Dirks, Kim (Legal) [mailto:kimberlee.dirks@thomsonreuters.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2018 4:00 PM
To: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>; WCAG List <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: RE: Abstract update - new content terms

-1

I like the new approach except for the last sentence. We should not be directing any company’s policy.

We either need to strike the last sentence or have a lot more information and justification about what policy companies should have.

Proposed by Alistair:
“The publication of WCAG 2.1 does not deprecate or supersede WCAG 2.0. While WCAG 2.0 remains a W3C Recommendation, the W3C advises the use of WCAG 2.1 to maximize future applicability of accessibility efforts. The W3C also advises that new or updated Web accessibility policies reference WCAG 2.1.”

I would +1 if we strike the last sentence: The W3C also advises that new or updated Web accessibility policies reference WCAG 2.1.

Kim

From: Alastair Campbell [mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2018 11:02 AM
To: WCAG List <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
Subject: Abstract update - new content terms

Hi everyone,

We spoke about an update to the Abstract of WCAG 2.1 on Tuesday, and the wording used to balance between “WCAG 2.0 is still totally valid” and “Please use the updated version”.

A couple of people mentioned they were concerned about the “new & updated bit” here:
“The publication of WCAG 2.1 does not deprecate or supersede WCAG 2.0. While WCAG 2.0 remains a W3C Recommendation, the W3C recommends that new and updated content use WCAG 2.1 to maximize future applicability of accessibility efforts. The W3C also advises that new or updated Web accessibility policies reference WCAG 2.1.”

Can we simplify that by just removing the new & updated bit?
“The publication of WCAG 2.1 does not deprecate or supersede WCAG 2.0. While WCAG 2.0 remains a W3C Recommendation, the W3C advises the use of WCAG 2.1 to maximize future applicability of accessibility efforts. The W3C also advises that new or updated Web accessibility policies reference WCAG 2.1.”

You can see the proposed updates (apart from the above) in context in the diff view here:
https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/pull/903/files<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com_-3Furl-3Dhttps-253A-252F-252Fgithub.com-252Fw3c-252Fwcag21-252Fpull-252F903-252Ffiles-26data-3D02-257C01-257Cakirkpat-2540adobe.com-257C3738770d19ca4d04471108d5c08363a2-257Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1-257C0-257C0-257C636626592908805500-26sdata-3DCGbQHF4np7PhBjdcMZgcGGZV0-252BUoAk5nx4mqr8rGMus-253D-26reserved-3D0&d=DwMGaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-GVjSLmy8-1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=TNPSf5_s1C7GQN2fKXOGh6t05xN18F4fA5Kt3Nyy0IU&m=05Kt1Vxp-UkThgR-SZPrfXwLgmmi7ZLNWnB2mbbd1KY&s=m2Px2TsAHPR8_SYOP7FH7BMMNi0fvTLOqRfdYLbYrjc&e=>

Kind regards,

-Alastair

--

www.nomensa.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.nomensa.com_&d=DwMGaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-GVjSLmy8-1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=TNPSf5_s1C7GQN2fKXOGh6t05xN18F4fA5Kt3Nyy0IU&m=05Kt1Vxp-UkThgR-SZPrfXwLgmmi7ZLNWnB2mbbd1KY&s=CrVGXYdLITmOoC5Q9C99L-dVg0X78IiArLYJVh6K4EY&e=>
tel: +44 (0)117 929 7333 / 07970 879 653
follow us: @we_are_nomensa or me: @alastc
Nomensa Ltd. King William House, 13 Queen Square, Bristol BS1 4NT

Company number: 4214477 | UK VAT registration: GB 771727411