Re: [External] Re: [EXT] [Protocols] Agenda for April 8th, 2022 and Proposed Plan

Juanita writes:

> Would this replace any testing to validate that a company has met 1.2.2?
Or, if they say they’re adopting this protocol, does it just add a bit of
points to their total score, but they still have to meet the “testable”
aspects of the guideline or SC?

Putting aside the fact that SC 1.2.2 is a WCAG 2.x requirement, I believe I
still understand the question.

Looking at SC 1.2.2, it normatively states, "*Captions
<https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#dfn-captions> are provided for
all prerecorded <https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#dfn-prerecorded> audio
<https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#dfn-audio> content in synchronized media
<https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#dfn-synchronized-media>, except when the
media is a media alternative for text
<https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#dfn-media-alternative-for-text>** and is
clearly labeled as such.*" This is, by my reading, mandating the provision
of captions, but does not speak to the *quality* of captions. Today, this
means (or at least could be argued) that, for example, YouTubes
auto-generated captions are meeting the minimum requirement of SC 1.2.2:
captions ARE being provided, but as we all know in practice, sometimes
those "craptions" are far from useful. But, from a narrow and strict
reading of the normative text, SC 1.2.2 does not make any demands on
quality.

Adopting something like Caption Key as a protocol starts to introduce the
idea that *quality* captions are what is really needed, but recognizes that
measuring quality is subjective. However, if you apply the guidance
outlined by Caption Key you stand a far greater chance of creating quality
captions, and so when it comes to scoring, I will reward you 'some' points
for providing captions (based on ACT-style rules), but 'more points' if you
also apply the principles of Caption Key to your output. (Requirement +
Protocol = Final score: Protocols augment Requirements)

(In this regard, EO's alt text decision tree is potentially a basic and
rudimentary candidate protocol, as it seeks to 'educate' content authors
*how* to arrive at a useful and quality text alternative).

So it's not either/or, but rather Good, Better, Best...

JF

On Thu, Apr 7, 2022 at 9:21 AM Jaunita George <
jaunita_george@navyfederal.org> wrote:

> Would this replace any testing to validate that a company has met 1.2.2?
> Or, if they say they’re adopting this protocol, does it just add a bit of
> points to their total score, but they still have to meet the “testable”
> aspects of the guideline or SC?
>
>
>
> And if saying that they followed the protocol gains them points, is there
> any limit to how many points they can gain? Or can an organization say
> they’re following all sorts of protocols and bump their score up to any
> level?
>
>
>
> *Jaunita George, JD, PMP, WAS (she/her)*
>
> *QA-ADA Analyst III, **Product Engineering & Delivery Services (ISD)*
>
> *DHS Certified Trusted Tester (TTV5)*
>
> [image: IAAP WAS circular badge and horizontal name logo for International
> Association of Accessibility Professionals (IAAP) Web Accessibility
> Specialist (WAS) credential. To the left is a dark blue circle with three
> lines of centered white text that read: IAAP Certified WAS. There is a
> smaller light blue circle that surrounds the dark blue inner circle that
> designates the WAS credential color scheme. To the right, two lines of dark
> blue text. Top text reads Web Accessibility Specialist, second line reads
> International Association of Accessibility Professionals.]
> <https://www.accessibilityassociation.org/s/wascertification>
>
> Navy Federal Credit Union, 820 Follin Lane, Vienna VA 22180
>
> W: 571-391-0356 | C: 206-778-1882
>
>
>
> [image: Navy Federal Credit Union. Our members are the mission.]  [image:
> Digital A11ies -- Working Together for All]
>
>
>
> *From:* John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>
> *Sent:* Thursday, April 7, 2022 8:58 AM
> *To:* John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>
> *Cc:* Jaunita George <jaunita_george@navyfederal.org>; Jennifer
> Strickland <jstrickland@mitre.org>; public-silver@w3.org;
> w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
> *Subject:* Re: [External] Re: [EXT] [Protocols] Agenda for April 8th,
> 2022 and Proposed Plan
>
>
>
> Might I also offer as another potential Protocol something that Wilco
> asked about a week or so ago... and that is Caption Key (
> https://dcmp.org/learn/captioningkey
> <https://secure-web.cisco.com/1SolsNGoqdTXSlh7NxIbGgIAUfoY2TE6u9k_xmMrDem6XdvWesSz8_MdIKjGKveFP_C0E1rqaid_ZWvIHsS0hntubQgzUfOPLik2pMzhvqlcKfuX31A1ykp3CPaMNfMhv75RzEo8xyp7KyyZ0f40hiJUYuBSRBcSIlHG8A3odEjWFirMupF2i9JjhDpcnfdvASQuBp2W42Zu4vvm6n1owH2jH7m5Cx4r_FNKDhlZ6zoWCeS48XUxoCJZntr_5nKUj22aOrKBtEU-dA2_gVvePAinc-CbsRt2bxdaIB8O09ch-0zpx46SkOmb9yztJnjtL22A3BFX87SgI_8KvlyVOA2u0FYhVZUT-5kkKNVdfLGapWf7mvy0wnFgcslwXLiklYr628mwo7UCyG8moCO13O-GcB3hPi7wnOmR93bZGini29R23fpnXtodXQlfTI01m7Ml4vvdbkZJtmzxyFfPCgg/https%3A%2F%2Fdcmp.org%2Flearn%2Fcaptioningkey>
> )
>
>
>
> As part of that larger site, it outlines "Elements of Quality Captioning
> <https://secure-web.cisco.com/184ycatIGNo0NAq8sjTpwk1uUdC40OW5vT-QiFBNdqDWg2zRW2VeT--TIDnurzKwP6gVr3Zy-AYMT__jW_5xWBeAIgoorOGNRQdB8VVUZYJlAmx_BnmA3tqtRgDDSseBOIg4BdPuaU-pz5t64a431IWoSwvq9uhBx6bcUvDDQfbDI2WwLwjCITiCGGvGXDsdKxVqge09P5_wXCF5XdnfzDSAiWw0hKCf3LZiHojKcHwM-6ChR_0G-yQeMv5TsniHqabULuSlD2Hfl5laIFQxDTvakckDlw6hO2czCBoIU6c3a9vEj72imgFTDWhj8Dupp6gCMhqVgUbZM4kjx4IhjLwbKHcnBjk4wI58dJnmj_o-60DLOP9Av5QW8AUoBy389znhRu7EUV6uFY0nGqOr2pWGe9cw5THxQagcgOPiz_9oa2RzQrRsYUCI6FNI6VvvKk0tsaxX1cGem01KgoLHoTQ/https%3A%2F%2Fdcmp.org%2Flearn%2Fcaptioningkey%2F599%233>",
> which includes the following expected outcomes:
>
> ·       Accurate: Errorless captions are the goal for each production. ·
> Consistent: Uniformity in style and presentation of all captioning
> features is crucial for viewer understanding. ·       Clear: A complete
> textual representation of the audio, including speaker identification and
> non-speech information, provides clarity. ·       Readable: Captions are
> displayed with enough time to be read completely, are in synchronization
> with the audio, and are not obscured by (nor do they obscure) the visual
> content. ·       Equal: Equal access requires that the meaning and
> intention of the material is completely preserved.
> (I find it interesting that the first bullet point sets out a "goal" but
> not a mandate: they recognize that 'errorless' simply cannot happen
> 'always', but that it should not put off entities from striving for
> errorless captions - only that the odd error is not "the end of the world".
> I wonder aloud if this is or would be part of a protocol's expectation -
> strive for perfect but accept less-than-perfect? Additionally, bullet 2
> seeks "uniformity" but comes up short in defining what uniformity must look
> like.)
>
> However, on the plus side, the 'authority' of who authored these goals is
> beyond question (well, at least to me), and so as another element of
> defining a protocol, we could consider who authored the protocol in the
> first place - and I believe we could certainly be the gate-keeper on which
> protocols would be in scope by our spec (this avoids any entity making up
> their own stuff in an attempt to 'gain points').
>
> JF
>
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2022 at 8:44 AM John Foliot <john@foliot.ca> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
>
>
> > At the request of the COGA team, let’s avoid using “Making Content
> Usable” as an example of a protocol.
>
>
>
> Really? Where and when did that request come to this group? I have to
> admit, I am somewhat astounded that as the larger group is seemingly moving
> closer towards ACT-type tests (agreed-to and in our charter) that COGA now
> think that the document that emerged because they could not author
> their needs to fit the WCAG 2.x structure will be malleable enough to fit
> into Methods in WCAG 3.
> Oh well...
>
>
>
> > Plain language is a good example, especially for clear language when
> applied to content in English
>
>
>
> Hmmm... this statement seems to imply that plain language and clear
> language are not the same. Can you elaborate more on this please? What are
> the differences, and what (if any) impact does that have on content
> created?
>
>
>
> > I would imagine that companies of different sizes would implement
> protocols that would apply to companies of their size
>
>
>
> Protocols? (as in plural?) In the context of user testing, I am
> unfamiliar with even one specific document that could serve as a scalable
> protocol today, and yet this seems to suggest we could emerge with multiple
> protocols (based on company size) for any given topic/need. I fear this
> introduces yet another barrier: defining 'size' and the breakpoints
> required for that. Is size based on head-count? Revenues? Impact on
> society? Something else? It's relatively easy to contrast a giant (IBM)
> against a small company (https://www.fullcycle.ca
> <https://secure-web.cisco.com/1h4yFLHRg-y1ttKNNIgA498RB7XzGlDDXB47KZqYeCYOVyUtcgZTvDvoxeTzX9BwM2ooFILWJkVF9Gx7jHVmYYjLqeA6jIuDv7lw_PTNdi2xmQNY-_n_6DZkiMHJ7c62xbYx1ugAhFrLRjKn2r9EZ9S3l3LqFcBjM7S8-P7BVpv8bXXqqzBjPs1L_SNkMxxgoA8XT0Pph6s7vXYJTsMJKRt8wJH8pEl4qoi0dkOBkQ9FjKh21WwGNTe_NkQt6kxulK5H78F5ceCdgO9MWGcf5hhf2XSlp2USH7c-18jQaloLSlVHClGgf0FdZQC3TqkxjYIcGWRy99civ4iMIRRt9FLnMTxpLfL2pmX-2WBavSev4621_wSWLDTCvopOxnQ2KLCCUwxDpbeK7Uw4VUS9GV0jAqfQD1us5YymBbTL1ZxaIYFkLSeHz967upGIdHg67lyGyBsTzoEaQIKHJiYte1A/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.fullcycle.ca>),
> but what about companies "in the middle"?
>
> But, this also seems to contradict the idea that as a first pass, we will
> look at plain language (as defined at plainlanguage.gov
> <http://secure-web.cisco.com/19tG_vx_KpKkWWkzGEOzlmlMqucQwi3wotDfUDEh4p-5zjyyPfKaGIqJZXuy0_0S9_L1uii7K7XkLxEYK9oQwG93FAp5xtxlU12hEkkOvOXDAsKH7HVafYYQDce6RlqR2L886P6PhPOFs6JIomDc80wYJe4GeqMECpxxpyklXtMI9WKKF2C2pdBimpdINIB4nAKwMmFtyEKCbTSAyjmm4xO4vUPl8bJEl2VgiiVJvhdfr2Bx98pGXBW_e4BDMq0eUSIVStwGEHNVisBuW-32zDnQrU7uZgmavMUdS9WmN3ozVqiyJ-wi06iS_0MlN4d8LA-sirWNkEshr3zOR8O-ad7V-pEDOzaLNc0DSvG4O97n9FV8Wp_wycYj53PgsoPIzJsnkdpeAml5PZovq2c_lqcjACKrmu6RVQsixWaaJTdSPVU7i-QylkyVQPIcMMjDcsUkJj8kUvTjMG37vQLZkjw/http%3A%2F%2Fplainlanguage.gov>).
> That is a single document (protocol) that is applicable to all sizes and
> shapes of web sites. So as an open question, do others believe that we
> might have protocols based on the size of an entity?
>
>
>
> > I am a little concerned that it’ll be difficult to make progress if we
> focus on a definition without giving concrete examples about how protocols
> will be used.
>
>
>
> Indeed. I personally have always felt that specific "outcomes" is
> counter to the idea of a protocol - I suppose I am focused more on the
> concept of an "Operational Protocol". (I found this definition
> <https://secure-web.cisco.com/1Sn1j7ZWFJk0X8C1pExa8nXPSDo6s3-FBuNqgsjTgiul_JR_1CjaPX2aW0em7SuEdbElERMdg_V4BSH2suWbXQp9wakZHHT4_g4prljVb8bDSp31UTVzR4L0peXH6McUIhERPE9WOQFNPLIFl9VaqsUDGJz-hhWpvD3sDC4QbgkR82yGzCZsPff0-WIGkB58jYi9TIVJUeaaLrleO4g2borheYF-FhCfxEKL7z9noA5VKKk-QFDWFiyeGYwUagaDOzOMyWi8vHcJ136HH7uZBFKQdfRrLpSponsaFYZPH5Qe81ZCkmuOhtOdQU7osGDoWuUn3JuKJgsggOLVwZtkqwHxxzK4h8C3ru-B-7QYohMTSArf5g-WxrstBO56nuQqzAhlIzRsqZV34esvqlWq4x59kWmO_4oyc2cQ7DjtX_YNTpViKtDxwOGCehT3GZIAR5yCruDKjGsp1mYwr8uHFig/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.lawinsider.com%2Fdictionary%2Foperational-protocols>,
> used in the context of municipal governance: "*Operational Protocols
> <https://secure-web.cisco.com/1Sn1j7ZWFJk0X8C1pExa8nXPSDo6s3-FBuNqgsjTgiul_JR_1CjaPX2aW0em7SuEdbElERMdg_V4BSH2suWbXQp9wakZHHT4_g4prljVb8bDSp31UTVzR4L0peXH6McUIhERPE9WOQFNPLIFl9VaqsUDGJz-hhWpvD3sDC4QbgkR82yGzCZsPff0-WIGkB58jYi9TIVJUeaaLrleO4g2borheYF-FhCfxEKL7z9noA5VKKk-QFDWFiyeGYwUagaDOzOMyWi8vHcJ136HH7uZBFKQdfRrLpSponsaFYZPH5Qe81ZCkmuOhtOdQU7osGDoWuUn3JuKJgsggOLVwZtkqwHxxzK4h8C3ru-B-7QYohMTSArf5g-WxrstBO56nuQqzAhlIzRsqZV34esvqlWq4x59kWmO_4oyc2cQ7DjtX_YNTpViKtDxwOGCehT3GZIAR5yCruDKjGsp1mYwr8uHFig/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.lawinsider.com%2Fdictionary%2Foperational-protocols>** means
> the administrative policies and procedures of an EMS System or that provide
> guidance for the day-to-day operation of the system.*"  For me, the key
> is the final phrase, "...*provide guidance** for the day-to-day operation
> of the system*." )
>
>
>
> Success, in that context, may ebb and flow when applied to specific output
> (sometimes results will be better than other times), but the operational
> protocol keeps the 'team' pointed in the right direction, and provides
> guidance and education when faced with broad (or even specific) decision
> making.
>
>
>
> *A Concrete Example:*
> (Remembering that my proposal awards entities for *adopting protocols*,
> and not the output based on that adoption... And that a large part of the
> key is the public assertion, using a specific reporting format.)
>
>
> *Large Company:* With offices in 3 continents and an employee base of
> 18,000+ employees, the XYZ Widget company adopts the guidance found at
> plainlanguage.gov
> <http://secure-web.cisco.com/19tG_vx_KpKkWWkzGEOzlmlMqucQwi3wotDfUDEh4p-5zjyyPfKaGIqJZXuy0_0S9_L1uii7K7XkLxEYK9oQwG93FAp5xtxlU12hEkkOvOXDAsKH7HVafYYQDce6RlqR2L886P6PhPOFs6JIomDc80wYJe4GeqMECpxxpyklXtMI9WKKF2C2pdBimpdINIB4nAKwMmFtyEKCbTSAyjmm4xO4vUPl8bJEl2VgiiVJvhdfr2Bx98pGXBW_e4BDMq0eUSIVStwGEHNVisBuW-32zDnQrU7uZgmavMUdS9WmN3ozVqiyJ-wi06iS_0MlN4d8LA-sirWNkEshr3zOR8O-ad7V-pEDOzaLNc0DSvG4O97n9FV8Wp_wycYj53PgsoPIzJsnkdpeAml5PZovq2c_lqcjACKrmu6RVQsixWaaJTdSPVU7i-QylkyVQPIcMMjDcsUkJj8kUvTjMG37vQLZkjw/http%3A%2F%2Fplainlanguage.gov>.
> That guidance sets forth 8 specific outcomes:
>
>    - *Write for your audience*
>    - *Organize the information*
>    - *Choose your words carefully*
>    - *Be concise*
>    - *Keep it conversational*
>    - *Design for reading*
>    - *Follow web standards*
>    - *Test your assumptions*
>
> As to 'how' the XYZ Widget company applies and 'meets' this protocol, I
> will again offer a strawman example (based on the public attestation piece):
>
> "The XYZ Widget company's editorial team have adopted the plain language
> requirements found at plainlanguage.gov
> <http://secure-web.cisco.com/19tG_vx_KpKkWWkzGEOzlmlMqucQwi3wotDfUDEh4p-5zjyyPfKaGIqJZXuy0_0S9_L1uii7K7XkLxEYK9oQwG93FAp5xtxlU12hEkkOvOXDAsKH7HVafYYQDce6RlqR2L886P6PhPOFs6JIomDc80wYJe4GeqMECpxxpyklXtMI9WKKF2C2pdBimpdINIB4nAKwMmFtyEKCbTSAyjmm4xO4vUPl8bJEl2VgiiVJvhdfr2Bx98pGXBW_e4BDMq0eUSIVStwGEHNVisBuW-32zDnQrU7uZgmavMUdS9WmN3ozVqiyJ-wi06iS_0MlN4d8LA-sirWNkEshr3zOR8O-ad7V-pEDOzaLNc0DSvG4O97n9FV8Wp_wycYj53PgsoPIzJsnkdpeAml5PZovq2c_lqcjACKrmu6RVQsixWaaJTdSPVU7i-QylkyVQPIcMMjDcsUkJj8kUvTjMG37vQLZkjw/http%3A%2F%2Fplainlanguage.gov>
> into their internal authoring guide. All editorial personnel at the XYZ
> Widget company are aware-of and use this authoring document when writing
> materials related to the XYZ Widget company's products, offerings, and
> related corporate information."
>
>
>
> This is written as a factual statement, without actually offering any
> examples or 'proof' that (for example) every member of the editorial team
> has a printout of the plainlanguage.gov
> <http://secure-web.cisco.com/19tG_vx_KpKkWWkzGEOzlmlMqucQwi3wotDfUDEh4p-5zjyyPfKaGIqJZXuy0_0S9_L1uii7K7XkLxEYK9oQwG93FAp5xtxlU12hEkkOvOXDAsKH7HVafYYQDce6RlqR2L886P6PhPOFs6JIomDc80wYJe4GeqMECpxxpyklXtMI9WKKF2C2pdBimpdINIB4nAKwMmFtyEKCbTSAyjmm4xO4vUPl8bJEl2VgiiVJvhdfr2Bx98pGXBW_e4BDMq0eUSIVStwGEHNVisBuW-32zDnQrU7uZgmavMUdS9WmN3ozVqiyJ-wi06iS_0MlN4d8LA-sirWNkEshr3zOR8O-ad7V-pEDOzaLNc0DSvG4O97n9FV8Wp_wycYj53PgsoPIzJsnkdpeAml5PZovq2c_lqcjACKrmu6RVQsixWaaJTdSPVU7i-QylkyVQPIcMMjDcsUkJj8kUvTjMG37vQLZkjw/http%3A%2F%2Fplainlanguage.gov>
> site content on their desk, which they refer to daily. Yet, with little
> effort, 3rd parties *should* be able to find evidence that the principles
> of plain language are being used by the editorial team (sometimes results
> will be better than other times). In practice, here are two examples:
>
>    - *Write for your audience*
>    Strawman: Because of the size of the company, aspects of
>    internationalization will be applicable here. So, for example, when writing
>    for an international audience, awareness of cultural norms and taboos will
>    impact editorial decisions. Additionally, given the size of the
>    organization, there are editorial teams located around the world, and the
>    company has already established an internal authoring guide, (similar to
>    the design guide they give their clients when their clients wish to use the
>    company's logo in localized advertising efforts).
>    - *Organize the information*
>    Strawman: When looking more closely at this goal, it states the
>    following: Make it easy to follow, Add useful headings, Have a topic
>    sentence, Place the main idea before exceptions and conditions, Use
>    transition words, *Use lists*.
>
>    This is all broad guidance, but not easy to 'measure': for example
>    this document states "use lists", but then stops short of when, where, how
>    many, etc. However I think we all know it does not mean
>
>
>    - make
>       - everything
>       - a
>       - list
>
> (...and the requirement falls short of defining what type of list: bullet,
> ordered, or definition. I could choose one list type, and Jennifer could
> choose another list type, and who is to say which choice is better than the
> other?)
>
>
>
> So 'subjectively', before an entity can 'meet' this bullet point,
> education and understanding of when, where, why and which types of lists
> are preferable needs to happen (and again, for the XYZ Widget company, the
> i18n context is applicable)
>
>
>
> *Small Company: *The Smith Family Yard Services is a family-run business
> that has been in operation for 23 years, providing yard maintenance and
> landscape design services. Founded by Fred Smith in 1999, the company
> includes Fred, his two sons Bob and Joe, and Fred's wife Jane, who manages
> the office and is responsible for all of the book-keeping, customer service
> (answers the phone), and has been tasked with keeping their online presence
> up to date. Jane uses GoDaddy to create and maintain the family business
> website.
>
>
>
> Attestation:
> "The Smith Family Yard Services strives to meet the requirements laid out
> at plainlanguage.gov
> <http://secure-web.cisco.com/19tG_vx_KpKkWWkzGEOzlmlMqucQwi3wotDfUDEh4p-5zjyyPfKaGIqJZXuy0_0S9_L1uii7K7XkLxEYK9oQwG93FAp5xtxlU12hEkkOvOXDAsKH7HVafYYQDce6RlqR2L886P6PhPOFs6JIomDc80wYJe4GeqMECpxxpyklXtMI9WKKF2C2pdBimpdINIB4nAKwMmFtyEKCbTSAyjmm4xO4vUPl8bJEl2VgiiVJvhdfr2Bx98pGXBW_e4BDMq0eUSIVStwGEHNVisBuW-32zDnQrU7uZgmavMUdS9WmN3ozVqiyJ-wi06iS_0MlN4d8LA-sirWNkEshr3zOR8O-ad7V-pEDOzaLNc0DSvG4O97n9FV8Wp_wycYj53PgsoPIzJsnkdpeAml5PZovq2c_lqcjACKrmu6RVQsixWaaJTdSPVU7i-QylkyVQPIcMMjDcsUkJj8kUvTjMG37vQLZkjw/http%3A%2F%2Fplainlanguage.gov>.
> As part of that commitment, the maintainer of The Smith Family Yard
> Services web presence has taken the online training provided at "The
> Essentials of Plain Language" - a nine part training
> <https://secure-web.cisco.com/1et8JlmTaMTWIDBW3PLZOiG7QS5C8XgAPCbB1V7jLgrJlOxkbVFazwno9FEcWxzY1DU7QGz5sgm9y_JcEZvoR-nWRyk72axHduUMzKx3RpTzmk5oD2Fcx8HrayPLy9FgJm4fkGnu5e2u-ak7tiycsdU-Qx_pwEW3aIFGee31IeOQh1YGqgzDm55BFwIzGjeDYCCFjKPnReWQo6hnFRuD0kF7u1T2IyHdXcdPF1REFjmLAXAkgKN4WCZoB5KTAo8KvMjQqhmGbAJMJpO7p0Acs2KjpEIxrt-dkhdqTjmgUKuNQlcrq3WBqP5o2GmwSg3PAgx3aRr45ltQb4CGXvKB4ehtaEpJrTlmDdg-0hijVT6kE0GnTdC95hEgVNsQD7wS4PElaHW09ourI_Y9bwiCwCXfX-VGHEf5xDoriUuXGr9dQzg0qFxz9P89CmlI61htbYO4_X0MNZUM9PV45DtD-FA/https%3A%2F%2Facademy.govloop.com%2Fwatch%2FhDzHyqdB4T7K3fjbvuGk8B> that
> covers plain language principles."
>
>
>
> Now, yes, I have concocted these strawman examples to serve to illustrate
> my perspective, but clearly the two example businesses are light-years
> apart. Yet, when you step back, both of them can, in a size and
> scale-appropriate way, adopt and attest to the adoption of plain language
> as outlined at plainlanguage.gov
> <http://secure-web.cisco.com/19tG_vx_KpKkWWkzGEOzlmlMqucQwi3wotDfUDEh4p-5zjyyPfKaGIqJZXuy0_0S9_L1uii7K7XkLxEYK9oQwG93FAp5xtxlU12hEkkOvOXDAsKH7HVafYYQDce6RlqR2L886P6PhPOFs6JIomDc80wYJe4GeqMECpxxpyklXtMI9WKKF2C2pdBimpdINIB4nAKwMmFtyEKCbTSAyjmm4xO4vUPl8bJEl2VgiiVJvhdfr2Bx98pGXBW_e4BDMq0eUSIVStwGEHNVisBuW-32zDnQrU7uZgmavMUdS9WmN3ozVqiyJ-wi06iS_0MlN4d8LA-sirWNkEshr3zOR8O-ad7V-pEDOzaLNc0DSvG4O97n9FV8Wp_wycYj53PgsoPIzJsnkdpeAml5PZovq2c_lqcjACKrmu6RVQsixWaaJTdSPVU7i-QylkyVQPIcMMjDcsUkJj8kUvTjMG37vQLZkjw/http%3A%2F%2Fplainlanguage.gov>.
> And, as part of the attestation, there is a declarative statement that
> references education in both examples. The "How" of that education is
> completely different, but the net result remains that both companies are
> attesting to the fact that both are aware of the need/requirement for plain
> language, and have taken proactive steps to address that need - again in a
> size and scale-appropriate way.
>
> I guess that this is the long way of saying that we cannot "measure" the
> output of either company against each other, but in both of my sample
> attestations, the idea of providing evidence of 'education' is an important
> 'proof point' (which the Maturity Model folks are using in their effort).
> And so, when applying a protocol against these two concrete examples, the
> commonality is in the approach to applying the protocol, and not the output
> that results from that protocol.
>
>
>
> Respectfully,
>
>
>
> JF
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2022 at 9:27 PM Jaunita George <
> jaunita_george@navyfederal.org> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
>
>
> At the request of the COGA team, let’s avoid using “Making Content Usable”
> as an example of a protocol. It could imply that the information contained
> in there won’t be used in methods and other parts of WCAG 3.0, which isn’t
> necessarily the case. Plain language is a good example, especially for
> clear language when applied to content in English (maybe only in North
> America, not sure if it applies globally to all English speaking regions of
> the world).
>
>
>
> I am a little concerned that it’ll be difficult to make progress if we
> focus on a definition without giving concrete examples about how protocols
> will be used. It can be used to measure inputs and not outcomes in any of
> those scenarios identified in the agenda and it’s hard to picture what
> would make a good protocol without understanding how it’ll be used exactly.
>
>
>
> For user testing, I would imagine that companies of different sizes would
> implement protocols that would apply to companies of their size and would
> make sense for their business. User testing can be approached in theory in
> similar ways, however, no matter an organization’s size – you’ll still need
> to recruit a panel, define scope, etc. An organization, could then, in
> theory, use a protocol to help them create that process. It could also
> define a process for adding insights gained from user testing into an
> organization’s backlog or define ways an organization can
> implement/categorize feedback.
>
>
>
> With the user process example (like with screen reader testing), you would
> likely have an organization adopt guidance about how to perform screen
> reader testing generally that would include how screen readers work, how to
> test different kinds of functionality and such and then some expected
> behavior. This would be general guidance that can be applied to multiple
> guidelines and methods and would represent some general best practices that
> can be applied at scale. It’s likely that different kinds of folks using
> screen reader software for testing will get wildly different results (as a
> person who uses screen readers every day would have a different perspective
> than a QA tester), but the protocol can put some structure around that to
> help organizations achieve something more consistent. 😊
>
>
>
> Is there a single particular use case that everyone is moving towards? If
> so, we might want to define what that is and that might help us move
> forward. If it’s only for agenda item 1, for example and that’s the
> consensus, then we might want to define which (exactly) standards are so
> subjective that a protocol would help an organization achieve an outcome:
>
>
>
>    1. Would it only be clear language?
>    2. If there are other standards that would apply, would any of them
>    come from WCAG 2.x or only in some of the newer outcomes being defined in
>    WCAG 3.0?
>    3. In either case listed in two, would it be helpful to create a list?
>
>
>
> Seeing the universe of cases where protocols may apply could be helpful
> for defining the requirements for an acceptable protocol, but that
> definitely could just be my own opinion.
>
>
>
> What do folks think?
>
>
>
> *Jaunita George, JD, PMP, WAS (she/her)*
>
> *QA-ADA Analyst III, **Product Engineering & Delivery Services (ISD)*
>
> *DHS Certified Trusted Tester (TTV5)*
>
> [image: IAAP WAS circular badge and horizontal name logo for International
> Association of Accessibility Professionals (IAAP) Web Accessibility
> Specialist (WAS) credential. To the left is a dark blue circle with three
> lines of centered white text that read: IAAP Certified WAS. There is a
> smaller light blue circle that surrounds the dark blue inner circle that
> designates the WAS credential color scheme. To the right, two lines of dark
> blue text. Top text reads Web Accessibility Specialist, second line reads
> International Association of Accessibility Professionals.]
> <https://secure-web.cisco.com/19XjS-3jc60o9w2HMPMzCN__NCYkXtVJH6ie09GLZzURiHwp_JwhCppF1JlsZws5RiA6Z1S22Dy1jtnnwGYwiNNmauRqceo82Aq0NxK7_EV7qyU0_lW63SUh1DXcg4ZE9h-mWq--6ZnPJYP_a5wqCvqXgLiNuyZ-i4YT03CVCWD31nsjXrQ20EmPKM4nLIQI_RBt6RpkqZ41BZUwO1JFoXjo9Wb_GN4R-ju37PMYiMX7ygaEcwhCUaWBlNMpMi8TM4QibTNtRYHSSJt86DRXygB4_agUG4nSr-AaSIdbJ1AeDzM0DZDfSVkNxK3AwKmyUosK9ftoB0PUfsOcaj6s3vvouKdN8OR9jDfqJzmIivE5VfMxLgRqt1rnKX-mpd_7WqGq2y2fXPGbzd7V8rfeMzkLS5Yk2Yw84s861XdMcKsglPBOYtyYMyZq6QMJFKkDvT__axwsbSUC08WYJQdAUvQ/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.accessibilityassociation.org%2Fs%2Fwascertification>
>
> Navy Federal Credit Union, 820 Follin Lane, Vienna VA 22180
>
> W: 571-391-0356 | C: 206-778-1882
>
>
>
> [image: Navy Federal Credit Union. Our members are the mission.] [image:
> Digital A11ies -- Working Together for All]
>
>
>
> *From:* John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 6, 2022 7:40 PM
> *To:* Jennifer Strickland <jstrickland@mitre.org>
> *Cc:* Jaunita George <jaunita_george@navyfederal.org>;
> public-silver@w3.org; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org; Benjamin Feigel <
> Benjamin_Feigel@navyfederal.org>
> *Subject:* [External] Re: [EXT] [Protocols] Agenda for April 8th, 2022
> and Proposed Plan
>
>
>
> Hi All
>
>
>
> A *strong +1* to Jenn's comment, and a reminder that we had originally
> agreed that "Protocols measure inputs and not outcomes." (7 January 2022
> <https://secure-web.cisco.com/1DnoYE9Nk9im8xHHdlEwNUiP3J3o9S1NJgh3iKPH60aqH7Vjbpo5op7zW0HCvTTxGcJj0LFeqnZcHmTu3YQrIOxsRl7XIGISptTBogKMGL6AyIiamnm0rgm6IwTI2zwecIi7mYNxVFInR2lcuj9jY1lVhdVnaZn3IiRzaDPoMLhLkW1_F1K9PoWXm5PtCk_N8HWwVwPHtNOqkBXNsz88651maxViYSm0z7eRmsy2U963vxFGU2nSDJGFDrdSNUZv2cRhCMc2VWC-zjb7qwzJY6SlpuVLuy4olwD0TRVOC4L7qkzX4CJmXRGP9H1l1Aatuc3XHajIjYOGANt1dfd2pa4fmYBtQzo9SEWMXj9WDtnCdkOkXpSkZecsY7FU4W8Icc6h1hNCH9unJp1ayFtJ1RKS7zg87-SQzeDa0XEtAHuk6YhzCDUoPKeLRdQIBIST1ZW8EMPMfo1tmqfQvxKJMfA/https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fw3c%2Fsilver%2Fwiki%2FProtocols%23key-decisions-agreed-on-with-date>
> ).
>
>
>
> Yet, as I read the agenda, it still feels like you want to look at
> outcomes. But this is where I think we get stuck - because determining
> outcomes for things that cannot be measured using ACT-Rules-like
> requirements will remain subjective and is the real problem.
>
>
>
> Why a problem?
> Because if/when you ask an entity whether they succeeded or not, *of
> course* they will claim that *in their opinion* they have. Yet, in the
> context of legislation, *of course* the litigant will say the contrary,
> that they haven't. *You're still trying to measure outcomes! *
>
>
>
> Attempting to measure these points of view cannot (I assert) be measured,
> for the basic reason that they are opinions. (...and as I used to tease my
> daughter, "everyone is entitled to a wrong opinion" ;-) )
>
>
>
> Continuing:
>
>    - *Protocol for how to perform testing against a user process.* (JF:
>    useful, but not in the context of actually making the content more
>    accessible, a 'protocol' like this would outline the steps you need to take
>    when testing, but does nothing to guide or inform content creators. And how
>    would a user-process be scoped, by whom, and how/why? Every time you
>    introduce a potential fork in the user-path [clicking on a help icon for
>    example] you have to build out your 'flow' to account for that... it
>    doesn't scale! And "happy path" testing will usually 'pass', by my
>    experience it's when the user has to deviate from the happy path that
>    things start to go sideways...)
>    - *Protocol for how an organization can do user testing *(JF: Again, a
>    useful set of guidance, but it may not scale either: Susan's Flower Shoppe
>    (with 3 stores in the tri-state area) will simply not be in a position to
>    do the same type of user-testing as Amazon or Facebook, and attempting to
>    determine any kind of stratification (different processes for different
>    sized orgs) will also introduce a real quagmire (where do you draw the
>    lines, and why?). I think the best you could ever get there would be an
>    assertion that user-testing was performed on [date] for the following flows
>    [list flows] - but... does that testing then absolutely ensure more
>    accessibility? (NOPE) The real win is taking results from user-testing and
>    applying that knowledge in the next round of development. *The real
>    value of user testing is what you learn from the testing, *and not the
>    actual testing itself.)
>
> Might I then respectfully suggest that rather than kicking off asking "*how
> we can use a protocol*" that instead we seek consensus on "*what makes a
> candidate protocol acceptable for use in WCAG 3*".
>
>
>
> If we remain true to earlier agreements (Protocols measure inputs and not
> outcomes) then I will suggest that a key commonality would be that it
> represents outcomes and guidance geared towards the *creation process*,
> and NOT the testing/evaluation/measuring process. Shift Left in practice!
>
>
>
> I personally envision adopting protocols as essentially promising
> (publicly - for the accountability piece) to do the requisite research to
> achieve the outcomes as described, and I argue that winning that education
> battle is worthwhile in-and-of-itself.
>
>
>
> So when *Making Content...COGA* or *PlainLanguage.gov* outline Outcomes
> and then explain the issue and strategies that individual entities could
> apply *in context* to their content, they are in fact 'teaching' - and I
> assert THAT is the real value of Protocols (as I envision the definition of
> the term related to WCAG 3).
>
>
>
> So with that definition, now Susan's Flower Shoppe and Amazon could both
> "learn what makes Plain Language" and then apply that learning to their
> content IN CONTEXT - scale is no longer a problem in the traditional sense
> (although it will be harder for larger orgs to remain consistent - but they
> will also be in a better position to have policies and processes in place
> due to the size of their org)
>
>
>
> JF
> (who hopes he can join the call Friday morning... stand by)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 6, 2022 at 4:05 PM Jennifer Strickland <jstrickland@mitre.org>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Jaunita and all,
>
> Thanks for communicating an agenda ahead of time. I think this can be very
> helpful and avoid using the meeting time to agree.
>
> Regarding #2, “Selecting and writing one protocol from scratch as an
> exercise,” I don’t think we would write a protocol. We could document how
> one might document using a protocol.
>
> Previously we said we agreed to use PlainLanguage.gov as the protocol and
> then ended up evaluating what the US Department of Labor documented for
> their efforts to meet, as I read it, the Plain Writing Act, which is
> related but a law rather than a protocol. Now there’s a proposal to test
> “Protocol for how to perform testing against a user process,” using screen
> reader testing as a user process — but do we have a protocol to use?
>
> Can we agree upon a protocol and site to test, go through the process of
> how a person might do that, as we previously agreed to do?
>
> Thanks,
> Jennifer
>
>
>
> *From: *Jaunita George <jaunita_george@navyfederal.org>
> *Date: *Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 3:38 PM
> *To: *"public-silver@w3.org" <public-silver@w3.org>, "w3c-wai-gl@w3.org" <
> w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> *Cc: *Benjamin Feigel <Benjamin_Feigel@navyfederal.org>
> *Subject: *[EXT] [Protocols] Agenda for April 8th, 2022 and Proposed Plan
> *Resent-From: *<w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> *Resent-Date: *Wednesday, April 6, 2022 at 3:37 PM
>
>
>
> Hi All,
>
>
>
> At the last meeting the team mentioned that I’ll be stepping in as a
> co-lead for the Protocols sub-group. I’m really excited to be working with
> you all in this capacity and to do what I can to further this discussion.
> I’m new to this, so please don’t hesitate to reach out if I make a mistake
> or forget something – I’m always available by email and am happy to also
> set aside time to meet and discuss any questions or comments you have. I
> really look forward to talking to you all on Friday. 😊
>
>
>
> *New meeting time:*
>
>
>
> Last meeting, we agreed to move our regular Friday meeting to 8:00am
> instead of 9:00am EST. This means that the Protocols Subgroup will be meet
> this *Friday, April 8th at 8:00 AM Boston Time (1400 UTC). *I sent out an
> invite, but please let me know if you didn’t receive it.
>
>
>
> *Plan for the next few meetings: *
>
>
>
> To help us answer some of these excellent questions we’ve tackling, I
> thought we could focus our efforts in the next few meetings to:
>
>
>
>    1. Achieving consensus on how we can use a protocol.
>
>
>
> After we’ve achieved consensus on that question, we can move on to:
>
>    1. Selecting and writing one protocol from scratch as an exercise.
>
>
>
> This may help us structure our discussions and help us continue moving
> forward on all of the wonderful work everyone’s doing – but let me know if
> you think we should change course at any time. This is only a proposal. 😊
>
>
>
> With this idea in mind, here’s an agenda that outlines three examples that
> show how a protocol could **in theory** be used. We can discuss each of
> these and maybe propose different or additional examples and add to the
> list. The idea will be to select one example and write a specific protocol
> that could be used for that example as an exercise.
>
>
>
> **** Agenda for Friday’s meeting ****
>
>
>
> agenda+ Protocol for a standard where test results vary so you can't
> create a test case. We'll be discussing clear language as an example.
>
> agenda+ Protocol for how to perform testing against a user process. We'll
> discuss screen reader testing as an example. **(*Definition: User Process*
> - Series of user actions, and the distinct interactive views that support
> the actions, where each action is required in order to complete an
> activity).**
>
> agenda+ Protocol for how an organization can do user testing
>
>
>
> *Meeting info:*
>
>
> The Zoom teleconference data is provided at this link:
> https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/bfc72cd9-fdfc-4847-826a-01afb9e3f5e7/20211105T090000
>
> We will be on IRC using the W3C server at https://irc.w3.org
> <https://secure-web.cisco.com/1bbHg1R0NpE7wu_f231-AnlS80Y-y5vJTvdOEWJENhb8A72iXd8LCnf3ggBw4-smyidfgNxC8x8umv7E05ehkUF2bZBz2YRztLLv4RKaBjPX52PKUDxmvfMGEBjoozskkcieYlkp03z0RNZpT4OYcOd4hVzq8R7ZxdOFKZWkBKST8tH_692bct2eWCZGqxEH2CqP3AYWJvaQCFfDc0IutM6Rj-U09KIPjPRnc7FV26Wdj10BaRhnKyirh5JjBQBiUijZJ9qa0yX2qAvF17eId_iMnLYZJUiOJFMccNsS6Lx1I4XZzBbvOxVip14Ng8wGLJfXvx15u76cOB7dAeH7XvgpoWs6R_tsGa3dqAcv4R_28w7gc_bd-NL4b_nyhs9ocwFRphYixX3lTUlkEH0Nokh_o6hHppEenQieUgyV9aZx_s1E0SmDtT5e5jzWNn35PIXxCXehg937DHDABmN_O-g/https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.com%2Fv3%2F__https%3A%2Firc.w3.org%2F__%3B%21%21ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ%21ZvVx1wh89EAXhBiorHpgvdpQRlEtQPxaEsJbJ7_Q3MrxtnQGs5lwbIC34ybOl3ZsYw%24>,
> in channel *#silver-protocols*
>
>
>
> *Where to find more information:*
>
>
> These and additional details of our work, including minutes, current,
> and archived draft documents are available on our subgroup wiki page here:
> https://github.com/w3c/silver/wiki/Protocols
> <https://secure-web.cisco.com/1TNW89z_MY_0wX1ZYm6hv5HS9mcihP85_ndBNUs4jpmXJbINRoeiL2PAOJpa48gu7ggqcaxvHcZwyDmk_ECpjpiMUgaWKtTr-m-I74FImn-3ikVIwa86LJPcN8hwZc-zIxld8vOpkMKuj8DOIBzEUkQSxpVAvG6QM5k6rIUvn5UWwVtD3jGjg4p4eOcnHvm-2wNCUEoe48xjGufzTTwNa312ZZktk4lQkG_1ur6TxT6m-t7nG-EjZ1_aT5QnxP1W05e9-VshxCDA7_jFtbuOuymikRPeuyrQEfPtulxR0eFvM9cHs42Bph8gxKy_7XqZnk9hsFYgkllVLW9UDnpau9WUQxWq-mTlt7DDfafP__A9wQbrcnkexMJ4u0s13-sS8AB8_tjJLZnbK3RhPQRGxlyArwz-iCfIthrluv7hfCYMML5BTIFe9fyZlBm0AUKKItBgs41V67OKE5DRc9pGtGw/https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fw3c%2Fsilver%2Fwiki%2FProtocols>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Jaunita George, JD, PMP, WAS (she/her)*
>
> *QA-ADA Analyst III, **Product Engineering & Delivery Services (ISD)*
>
> *DHS Certified Trusted Tester (TTV5)*
>
> [image: IAAP WAS circular badge and horizontal name logo for International
> Association of Accessibility Professionals (IAAP) Web Accessibility
> Specialist (WAS) credential. To the left is a dark blue circle with three
> lines of centered white text that read: IAAP Certified WAS. There is a
> smaller light blue circle that surrounds the dark blue inner circle that
> designates the WAS credential color scheme. To the right, two lines of dark
> blue text. Top text reads Web Accessibility Specialist, second line reads
> International Association of Accessibility Professionals.]
> <https://secure-web.cisco.com/1KQT2HpwaDwcn28aItsAgaue8wdYCC4sZY0KSP7v8e0y6O80eA0OX9NHGS9tNCifShUdIgOZS2de9CbRQK5e5KzDipD8TtlpcbFV326enom54lQyEviimbvQmq9a0OOD-_SimOVL13U3QfRnxQtSNzinjnSyt5ZuLuvIz3s9ZXskuix69i0yU9_9ZLFdtrdOHL11citwZyYdUEeQvlTR6JwA7D0dmdUmpVBrrIUG3vEm82BPVuSjFwBHdEKtA_wzmHQEhOuxwkXnFGf7v3ZdZadgXH-rRChC0Arj7G7TUbi3k6xwP8SEkcWAgCCI9ZrzPKAEXIPACNovIUh1SUYMSSHgu1nEYnsQoeA3DyX3nmYrtTIeF6ozoE5jc-TzrSp5vtRJwyvuFD5l085Adrb33wQDhB4abYvPTOHoKcMEo5zMMHvuSu0WVePXVpN5lJ5WbOSXJ0EO8tLcjK9JtRIq-dA/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.accessibilityassociation.org%2Fs%2Fwascertification>
>
> Navy Federal Credit Union, 820 Follin Lane, Vienna VA 22180
>
> W: 571-391-0356 | C: 206-778-1882
>
>
>
> [image: Navy Federal Credit Union. Our members are the mission.] [image:
> Digital A11ies -- Working Together for All]
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> *John Foliot* |
> Senior Industry Specialist, Digital Accessibility |
> W3C Accessibility Standards Contributor |
>
> "I made this so long because I did not have time to make it shorter." -
> Pascal "links go places, buttons do things"
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> *John Foliot* |
> Senior Industry Specialist, Digital Accessibility |
> W3C Accessibility Standards Contributor |
>
> "I made this so long because I did not have time to make it shorter." -
> Pascal "links go places, buttons do things"
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> *John Foliot* |
> Senior Industry Specialist, Digital Accessibility |
> W3C Accessibility Standards Contributor |
>
> "I made this so long because I did not have time to make it shorter." -
> Pascal "links go places, buttons do things"
>


-- 
*John Foliot* |
Senior Industry Specialist, Digital Accessibility |
W3C Accessibility Standards Contributor |

"I made this so long because I did not have time to make it shorter." -
Pascal "links go places, buttons do things"