- From: jake abma <jake.abma@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2022 20:13:48 +0100
- To: Jaunita George <jaunita_george@navyfederal.org>
- Cc: "Bradley-Montgomery, Rachael" <rmontgomery@loc.gov>, "public-silver@w3.org" <public-silver@w3.org>, "w3c-wai-gl@w3.org" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAMpCG4HWCoq3m=qw4626pEcA+w1QdYhFWxkK=nkFYBE7vPk2Vg@mail.gmail.com>
And another reaction I thought about after the call, you referred to the approach as a "VPAT like accountability", but I do not think that covers it. It's more of a PDAA approach (Policy Driven Accessibility Adoption) like Texas, Minnesota, etc. use next to / in extension of VPAT. The approach was developed by Jeff Kline (also Maturity group member) and Jay Wyant, specifically because VPAT is about the product only at a certain time / moment, but to be sure it will be, become, or stay accessible, you must know about the intention / approach / followed processes of an organization. https://www.nascio.org/resource-center/?selectedTopic=accessibility https://mn.gov/mnit/assets/Policy%20Driven%20Adoption%20for%20Accessibility%20%28PDAA%29%20CSUN-Public_tcm38-61817.pdf Op vr 4 mrt. 2022 om 19:59 schreef jake abma <jake.abma@gmail.com>: > Hey Jaunita, > > Please also see this page (translate into English): > https://www.digitoegankelijk.nl/wetgeving/wat-verplicht > > *Requirements* > > *Nr1.* requirement: Make websites more accessible based on the > requirements of chapter 9 of the European standard EN 301 549. These > requirements are identical to accessibility standard WCAG 2.1, level A + AA. > > *Nr2. *Publish an accessibility statement. > > *Nr3.* Continuing to work on either staying or fully complying with the > accessibility statement. > > So, if not 100% compliant yet (as probably 99% of all websites worldwide) > you MUST prove your path towards this goal. > It has already been proven for thousands of sites and apps that this > approach works better because there is a reward / grow factor build in > (indeed a "maturity / change your processes / apply and use protocol like > documentation) > > Cheers! > > Op vr 4 mrt. 2022 om 19:36 schreef Jaunita George < > jaunita_george@navyfederal.org>: > >> Hi all, >> >> >> >> I’m a little concerned with having this be something that could be used >> to meet standards. >> >> >> >> I feel like this would undo a lot of good work that’s taking place to >> hold organizations accountable if we try to make this a compliance standard >> or alternative to actually meeting the requirements. It also would make >> someone “compliant” if they show they’re trying to implement processes – >> which I feel is just going to result in lower accessibility across the >> board. Organizations everywhere have wonderful accessibility statements, >> but inaccessible products – and I think this could continue that worrying >> trend and lead to accessibility in name only. >> >> >> >> If we go this route, then we should just make it part of the maturity >> model and not tie it to standards compliance. It’s important if >> organizations try, but far more important if they achieve results and >> results should always be easily measurable. >> >> >> >> *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.] >> >> >> >> *From:* jake abma <jake.abma@gmail.com> >> *Sent:* Friday, March 4, 2022 1:28 PM >> *To:* Bradley-Montgomery, Rachael <rmontgomery@loc.gov> >> *Cc:* public-silver@w3.org; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org >> *Subject:* [External] Re: [Protocols] Minutes for March 4th, 2022 >> >> >> >> Please note the approach from Dutch government as mailed before, this was >> mentioned / used as a proposed starting point for "Possible ways to >> evaluate whether a protocol was done" derived from >> https://www.digitoegankelijk.nl/toegankelijkheidsverklaring/over-de-verklaring >> <https://secure-web.cisco.com/1bksw5hQXg9PYfUbtvrgUY0SeOxLJv2nVMRihu-4saz5ni8i0lcbUxbIx0qNe8zBLb__wriTFKMLyuVqvLwApBhCQ9K32hl0ct9yhLY2QFTReg-EjOBmimAuLYz9dBcM1qDLPIS11ZZEs8styO8bv8lciyhSRm9BasIzTJHzuJX_C2KgnLBTDMLD0D3WEd6RmXp3O_vCC_yoBeR_Q9g8GZPZFnXs5vgqSzDFWtIUsL1VU_ugA1wYqzbxsMsPz8rhgtD0Hn6szzml9SkCV8Gyz4b4xaQtdbT0RjRQXxZHngT5lHIb-zOFi6-tSU51R87DVcGdsMhzECW6zIhM4FMC8SdjbqRWqwqrKBgxPOzA2NwUT8YrV61Y7cetZ7Jega9rdoVRTl5fTHHcTJX-oMyA4nQ_mrABs78UMEsVrDEzpK4Yo0skZSyqRJngKEqsAXrwepPEc8zV9N8w4nf6pNXNzNA/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.digitoegankelijk.nl%2Ftoegankelijkheidsverklaring%2Fover-de-verklaring> >> >> >> >> *1. Previously (before 2020): ONLY 100% PASS / FAIL Compliancy Approach >> - *there were only two statuses (WCAG driven) >> >> >> >> *2. Present Day: *The current approach has *FIVE* compliance statuses >> !!! >> >> >> >> A: Fully Compliant >> B: Partially compliant (= in control statement) >> >> "agency has appointed concrete improvement measures READ: >> *ASSERTION* / FOLLOWING PROTOCOLS" >> C: First measures taken >> >> "Agency has taken concrete improvement measures to get that >> picture. READ: *ASSERTION* / FOLLOWING PROTOCOLS" >> >> D: Doesn't meet >> >> " Legal obligation prescribes agencies take the necessary >> measures >> >> Agency is urged to appoint concrete measures within a >> certain period of time, including planning. READ: *ASSERTION* / >> FOLLOWING PROTOCOLS" >> >> E: No accessibility statement published >> >> >> >> Op vr 4 mrt. 2022 om 16:11 schreef Bradley-Montgomery, Rachael < >> rmontgomery@loc.gov>: >> >> The minutes from the protocols subgroup >> <https://www.w3.org/2022/03/04-wcag3-protocols-minutes.html> are >> available. >> >> >> >> Summary: >> >> - We will be going through an exercise for the next few weeks to >> evaluate: >> >> >> - How to evaluate whether the protocol was done >> - How well the protocol was followed >> - How to evaluate the quality of the results (if possible) >> >> >> - We will be using the following (possible) protocols as examples to >> help with discussion: >> >> >> - Plain Language, Visma UX, (BBC Gel A11y section if 3rd is needed) >> >> >> - Possible ways to evaluate whether a protocol was done (Discussion >> still ongoing) >> >> >> - Require the organization to publicly state: >> >> >> - What protocol/part of protocol was done >> - How the protocol was embedded in content or organization? >> - How can the public see that the protocol was embedded? >> - Date statement was made >> >> >> - Key questions that need to be addressed later: >> >> >> - Definition of a protocol? >> - Is a protocol a document or part of a document? >> - How will we handle overlap with WCAG? The overlap will shift >> >> >> >> *From: *Chuck Adams <charles.adams@oracle.com> >> *Date: *Wednesday, March 2, 2022 at 1:42 PM >> *To: *"public-silver@w3.org" <public-silver@w3.org>, "w3c-wai-gl@w3.org" >> <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org> >> *Subject: *[Protocols] Agenda for March 4th, 2022 >> *Resent-From: *<w3c-wai-gl@w3.org> >> *Resent-Date: *Wednesday, March 2, 2022 at 1:41 PM >> >> >> >> Hi All, >> >> >> >> The Protocols Subgroup will meet again this Friday, March 4th at 9:00 AM >> Boston Time (1400 UTC). >> >> >> The Zoom teleconference data is provided at this link: >> >> >> https://www.w3.org/events/meetings/bfc72cd9-fdfc-4847-826a-01afb9e3f5e7/20211105T090000 >> <https://secure-web.cisco.com/1bBc-AeZLPPKOVvCExG0BbLyFYdagfVfi6hAuN7_FBdtZXh4Z-IDZQa11Uz5jnHurh-zQnEXFrU1PHmx0R7fK6XS-HoQLHIWyNdJXfTdBtc14_avFRLdaUczIaPPxQyTTNzok7P6cZuwwAP92oRfXqTX6DMFj_gnxyw6oMipmRtghaY8xXKoXcpIljDpqUy4soN38I3MvWyC5xosKGPRIJkKj3Js3DqWUeeq07_t5qtzGldc6Floe03VjydOTmwFybDeD-aw2EmyVKpI4A1kwGxDKgP3V1-_qZP1oxDokd0CrOKKRVZxN42-LOfekXZdm4uRmT1CRtyybc4sGJzRh7su1wxhrGnLgHAJr0AldhNVBQKloDmO9AOGHvxNAcRhTU0Ei4UB3aqXuz39egwtE0QxBpUuYchFWMZ45TAYabiOOBrAzZJFK6ib45TM0gi96JHEEoxvmuI7CV9EOno3gyQ/https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.com%2Fv3%2F__https%3A%2Fwww.w3.org%2Fevents%2Fmeetings%2Fbfc72cd9-fdfc-4847-826a-01afb9e3f5e7%2F20211105T090000__%3B%21%21ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ%21ZvVx1wh89EAXhBiorHpgvdpQRlEtQPxaEsJbJ7_Q3MrxtnQGs5lwbIC34yacGIQO4g%24> >> >> We will be on IRC using the W3C server at https://irc.w3.org >> <https://secure-web.cisco.com/1rI9UW3alosWZho6nVCm-E_dZkJ0BlrVmIyuglWkoUjfWBgRWm6nN35lmjZjFKf-INfhP42jq-fWcgnZi4RUDVZyTd_xV9MBOBw49_JX1_pme_MDZBZhjydUT4RaZ6RhKo0spYxpnqM39mlm1Lf_CG5Iu0Z9m9zjglM_9EkIVHROMeoDmfyAoOBMdLQRgmaYZ8IY_XcLmdZq4RO5Inf1p92eduUVe8o3W2peMTIyf-LVHNx3lugwhx5nr5v6d6gwGPBHRnntIKr1-FEnDe6A6OXihyqBL_vKW_vnHsF6e8sw-cLeuFeoZDWi7zaa5-jmzMTx3WcNZ_HZlwI2s6wh68dVVnRiVDH39gAi9MfLyJnYS7w9apy0GMFDaO9OHmJR0lTpKchQAqiUBvEj-mYvNwPpsMqsEU2IJFsprPrTeO2HSyb3JpM4ETuPgGnOxpzFjcFo2Lwo99TWCkAQDBMISHg/https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.com%2Fv3%2F__https%3A%2Firc.w3.org%2F__%3B%21%21ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ%21ZvVx1wh89EAXhBiorHpgvdpQRlEtQPxaEsJbJ7_Q3MrxtnQGs5lwbIC34ybOl3ZsYw%24>, >> in channel *#wcag3-protocols* >> >> These and additional details of our work, including minutes, current, >> and archived draft documents are available on our subgroup wiki page here: >> >> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Protocols >> <https://secure-web.cisco.com/1tjim_fOcxm_qDZXrWClV8REdYA-GUtSZbZl_fRtKIrUFR4njzqvyNYSuAc7Xt_z9cn5ms3Sjt80esOl0OKBBv0TXcn8KiNRzh1hRVN1_SUm2gAYvqsZRug-VWDmK9K_UdFhBk1M6LXyskr-8fKqgelQVFptVtkudhNLxizoUUtmhcEQcQJVHmE11FQSn1eUiy1ioZ__ISn5ZXS7eK4HK2twbyRpxCrsizjlg9l24mGO9WRpi6ku0TJgOU5hMfwZE_bWRRevB7sZoeCoEacO8oje3QzDpoHtjX0mDZs0-9qd7aTJL3eNpmIgHu1w0dysTvGbfBLY2tufQdmh2EgSEmt_nGS2DzGikOxxSJlSJqPsePi4-ngHgiVZfj-qZuAIaBVT11nYM70RJrUhEts5Xfk9C_96nnhG_Ic-lgRU3mVmcBZ0OULXfHqr0qJrd3pNwnkJm25EaJUz0DcCM-c9wFA/https%3A%2F%2Furldefense.com%2Fv3%2F__https%3A%2Fwww.w3.org%2FWAI%2FGL%2Ftask-forces%2Fsilver%2Fwiki%2FProtocols__%3B%21%21ACWV5N9M2RV99hQ%21ZvVx1wh89EAXhBiorHpgvdpQRlEtQPxaEsJbJ7_Q3MrxtnQGs5lwbIC34ya-s3KL6w%24> >> >> *** Agenda *** >> >> agenda+ Develop a way for a lay-person to assess whether a protocol was >> followed >> >> >> >> 1. Pick 2-3 things that are likely protocols (Plainlanguage.gov, BBC >> style guidelines, ?) >> 2. Propose a way to evaluate (pass/fail): >> >> i. Whether >> the protocol was done >> >> ii. How >> well the protocol was followed >> >> iii. The >> quality of the results >> >> Regards, >> >> Charles Adams >> >>
Attachments
- image/png attachment: image003.png
- image/jpeg attachment: image004.jpg
Received on Friday, 4 March 2022 19:14:15 UTC