Re: [External] Re: [Protocols] Minutes for March 4th, 2022

Here is a reminder on what WCAG3 protocols are currently scoped to accomplish:
https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Protocols#Participants
The key phrase, “Protocols help motivate organizations to implement accessibility technologies that are not specifically measurable.”
I do not agree that the W3C currently provides sufficient guidance for an objective observer to determine whether descriptive alt text meets the guidelines — and the teams I’ve worked with would agree it isn’t sufficient. A search on Twitter regarding WCAG reveals thousands of folks trying to meet the criteria but not comprehending what is expected. There are so many ways to interpret the standards — and the standards are not foolproof! For example, on a hospital website, if there is a photograph of the hospital, one person might thing that the image is solely decorative, another might believe that providing alt text to indicate what it is a photo of is sufficient, and another might think the photo description would provide more detail. All three would pass the criteria, but there’s a next-level way of considering the alt text that can provide usefulness to alt text users.
WCAG3 Protocols would allow you to use EN 301 549 as a protocol.
I want protocols to exist as a supplement to WCAG which the lay person struggles to comprehend, and people I’ve worked with over the past three decades wouldn’t understand EN 301 549, either. Very few understand what WCAG and Section 508 require, for example. What’s clear to me, as someone who worked in the field for so long, is not clear to the designers, devs, and product folks. We need to communicate clearly how to deliver accessible experiences as well as meet compliance. The guidance Plain Language and BBC Gel provide is more human-centered and empathetic. They are a supplement for the subjective characteristics, only.



From: Jaunita George <jaunita_george@navyfederal.org>
Date: Friday, March 4, 2022 at 2:08 PM
To: jake abma <jake.abma@gmail.com>
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>
Subject: RE: [External] Re: [Protocols] Minutes for March 4th, 2022
Hi again,

I wish we had something like EN 301 549 for the private sector. If this goes above and beyond current standards, I’m fine with that – but if it’s used to meet a standard, then we really need to make the standards that this would apply to extremely narrow. I believe an objective observer can determine whether someone’s met most standards – including descriptive alt text. There’s currently plenty of guidance published by the W3C that demonstrates what that means. Plain/clear language can also be similarly defined and assessed. There will always be edge cases, but an objective observer can make a determination. If a new standard doesn’t meet that level of specificity, maybe we need to take that back to the drawing board and define what we mean.

We want to encourage trying – but not at the expense of people, if we can help it.


Jaunita George, JD, PMP, WAS (she/her)
QA-ADA Analyst III, Product Engineering & Delivery Services (ISD)
DHS Certified Trusted Tester (TTV5)
[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

[Navy Federal Credit Union. Our members are the mission.]

From: jake abma <jake.abma@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, March 4, 2022 2:00 PM
To: Jaunita George <jaunita_george@navyfederal.org>
Cc: Bradley-Montgomery, Rachael <rmontgomery@loc.gov>; public-silver@w3.org; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: Re: [External] Re: [Protocols] Minutes for March 4th, 2022

Hey Jaunita,

Please also see this page (translate into English): https://www.digitoegankelijk.nl/wetgeving/wat-verplicht<https://secure-web.cisco.com/1c6E3vauBLOEXXTYGEVscPrIiBOtrOPhXTANQ9PsFh_qj1nnou_0ZEy8S96qbzcs07-4QiG12hZfRjPxm8viUeCk_AH_RMwQP2HQL-KxxfH2ex5aePx2oVCOJoH1q-N-BPzkBdgS51J9KhBc3OiIG9WtXaD_fWU4SRwo4MVgRVTIiVufaPysY-6S3FBPDRhvIahbaj5-8UeVLNDpkaM0P4fU3P1oEzx6qvRVArpwagCfjKf5r8L2WLS8CMAdiM-zeKrRhqGkTFZh30JLRGtnCjp6tJD3RxjwxjadAueUZNHrJSbLMv_J-ClDw_JUb7m1bP94jhxDnUG9jX_wl_WyzRI1Vsqvwk8E9r98_ANJlJ40_XcONAStpnGiFI-BXXOI1Uv7jJrxzxMBNuwEK7n_vrn1RTiSNkaFnFSoYfc1oXfsFWI9jyOkwBgqJd9RN6yCiXpBinWvOaR7E_6RPZsdPZg/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.digitoegankelijk.nl%2Fwetgeving%2Fwat-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<mailto: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)
[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/1xhp5ColvYuE1A7CsdZBcZ8SDTZNpgBYtPUyWMmVGp-HxIyReeCXP0MU6LT0louwRZoHqEUJxUDN-BnIsCNjKNIbJnbwQqisAqDgzJbuVzM43d-JFOQRggMV92dqyizpySN4pAaSkwKkHU-U0nxOIeQqy3PQRqVTvNXbYW_m1k7GCuoJ9lR0FZ6cfxD0kFzvx6RxXjgZalKd2ILi5nDtEmbrl75n-ZFKHpxS9Iy9ZI80fkMsx7gSUd-ZIGpsTqX5b3PHQq1r3tVcCIIlaC15A4GpL-X51_TiTrI1D4QCLwEf96-14OA2X-3VT1sm7g5Kjq2q5L6GyIvHm0rZfogerArmp6qlddbHkZzDcsN6pWuNlN3uZqyVfitVxxWj8i7PUBss0O1n9wVlVIArDTmGbyiV9Y5GHafDEqV6WMTYoQmEKT7ZZAQkYHq3-WFV9SfY2gy6Wybt4qmh0TVlrmsctLw/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

[Navy Federal Credit Union. Our members are the mission.]

From: jake abma <jake.abma@gmail.com<mailto:jake.abma@gmail.com>>
Sent: Friday, March 4, 2022 1:28 PM
To: Bradley-Montgomery, Rachael <rmontgomery@loc.gov<mailto:rmontgomery@loc.gov>>
Cc: public-silver@w3.org<mailto:public-silver@w3.org>; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto: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<mailto: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<mailto:charles.adams@oracle.com>>
Date: Wednesday, March 2, 2022 at 1:42 PM
To: "public-silver@w3.org<mailto:public-silver@w3.org>" <public-silver@w3.org<mailto:public-silver@w3.org>>, "w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
Subject: [Protocols] Agenda for March 4th, 2022
Resent-From: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto: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


     *   Pick 2-3 things that are likely protocols (Plainlanguage.gov, BBC style guidelines, ?)
     *   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