- From: Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>
- Date: Fri, 26 Jan 2018 14:35:27 +0000
- To: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <3393BCAF-D693-4689-9E22-5C67823BA163@adobe.com>
AGWG’ers, As we have received substantially positive feedback leading up to this CfC and six responses that that group members opposed the transition of the Editor’s Draft to CR, we would like to clarify how we are planning to address the concerns raised, but are moving forward and recognizing that this CfC is agreed on as a consensus opinion of the working group. Specifically, the Working Group agrees with the first option presented in the CFC survey. The CFC was conducted using a survey (https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Updated_CR_pub/results) and the objections all centered either around WCAG 2.1 needing to do more for users with cognitive disabilities (two comments) or needing to make a new change to editorial text in the WCAG 2.1 abstract (four comments). Regarding the text in question in the Abstract: 1. We are adding an Editor’s note to the abstract section that reads: The introduction to WCAG 2.0 says "even content that conforms at the highest level (AAA) will not be accessible to individuals with all types, degrees, or combinations of disability, particularly in the cognitive, language, and learning areas." While WCAG 2.1 provides additional guidance, it is still true that it does not provide universal coverage. The Working Group plans to add additional clarification about this in the next publication. 1. We will also create an issue in Github that references this Editor’s note to help the group and editors keep this on the radar to address soon. We do feel that it is important that the Working Group works together to reach consensus on this language rather than adding it just before CR. 1. In the WCAG 2.0 publication sections such as “layers of guidance” were included. These are currently linked from the WCAG 2.1 draft, but we expect that we will add these into the WCAG 2.1 during CR. The Layers of Guidance section is where this language is included: “Note that even content that conforms at the highest level (AAA) will not be accessible to individuals with all types, degrees, or combinations of disability, particularly in the cognitive language and learning areas. Authors are encouraged to consider the full range of techniques, including the advisory techniques, as well as to seek relevant advice about current best practice to ensure that Web content is accessible, as far as possible, to this community.” This language is clearly important to include, and to ensure that the abstract is harmonized with this language. 1. One of the comments raised concerns about Internationalization. The Group received comments related to internationalization during the last Working Draft and addressed these to the satisfaction of the commenters, but we will continue to pursue wide review of the CR publication, including from a broad set of languages. We hope that this course of action will address people’s concerns. This decision will be recorded at https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Decisions<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FWAI%2FGL%2Fwiki%2FDecisions&data=02%7C01%7C%7C1ab6006ec2be48e88f9008d4a210961e%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636311639507586899&sdata=IafGoKjeQf7zBqxVj8m380hh8%2BWgU1VfPa2tZjq0Bx8%3D&reserved=0> Thanks again to all for their hard work! Thanks, AWK Andrew Kirkpatrick Group Product Manager, Accessibility Adobe akirkpat@adobe.com<mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com> http://twitter.com/awkawk From: Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com> Date: Tuesday, January 23, 2018 at 13:25 To: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org> Subject: CFC - Transition UPDATED WCAG 2.1 Editor's Draft to Candidate Recommendation Resent-From: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org> Resent-Date: Tuesday, January 23, 2018 at 13:24 Call For Consensus — ends Thursday January 25th at 1:20pm Boston time. Please respond to this CFC through this survey: https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/Updated_CR_pub/<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2002%2F09%2Fwbs%2F35422%2FUpdated_CR_pub%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cakirkpat%40adobe.com%7Cfaafb0995c1f4dea9bac08d5628ea714%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636523287183498126&sdata=XaM7EUi25dJvzKJ7cIe4TxAqLz6lQM4N1DlIrGjRcYE%3D&reserved=0> If you have concerns about this proposed consensus position that have not been discussed already and feel that those concerns result in you “not being able to live with” this decision, please let the group know in the survey before the CfC deadline. 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%7C54093524ef264326424008d51cd66c05%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636446629619786436&sdata=c5UP0xiniJIppvd6Esu1XA%2FbX1ykpABkhgCCmBp%2Fht8%3D&reserved=0>
Received on Friday, 26 January 2018 14:51:15 UTC