Re: Removing 4.1.1

Hi Shadi,

If there is no impact, we should have no problem getting that confirmed in
writing. I am requesting that we get that confirmation as part of adopting
this change (without a change in version number), which I believe is simply
due diligence on our part.

JF

On Thu, Dec 22, 2022 at 11:29 AM Abou-Zahra, Shadi <sabouzah@amazon.at>
wrote:

> Hi John,
>
>
>
> You may have missed my response to Andrew and Patrick. I don’t agree that
> there is an immediate impact on legal requirements.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
>   Shadi
>
>
>
> ---
>
> Shadi Abou-Zahra
>
> Amazon Devices and Services
>
> Principal Accessibility Standards and Policy Manager
>
> ---
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>
> *Sent:* Thursday, 22 December, 2022 5:10 PM
> *To:* Abou-Zahra, Shadi <sabouzah@amazon.at>
> *Cc:* John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>; Sheri Byrne Haber <
> sbyrnehaber@vmware.com>; Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>;
> w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
> *Subject:* RE: [EXTERNAL]Removing 4.1.1
>
>
>
> *CAUTION*: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not
> click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know
> the content is safe.
>
>
>
> Hi Shadi,
>
>
>
> I understand that other W3C Recommendations can-be and are often updated,
> but none of them have an impact on legal requirements around the planet
> (that I am aware of).
>
>
>
> As Andrew notes:
>
>
>
> > So, if WCAG 2.0 was updated via an “Edited Specification” it seems that
> this would impact Section 508 immediately.
>
> Patrick also adds:
>
>
>
> > Ditto EN 301 549 which references WCAG 2.1 (and its various SCs) at the
> generic/stable https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21 address.
>
>
>
> I have serious reservations about us making changes that could have a
> trickle-down impact on dependencies outside of our control - to the point
> of filing a Formal Objection to these normative changes to the standard
> (unless we have prior written confirmation from both US and EU authorities
> that our changes will not materially impact their legislation(s)).
>
>
>
> Alastair writes:
>
>
>
> > +1 to Shadi on versioning.
>
>
>
> My response: -1 to Shadi on versioning.
>
>
>
> Respectfully,
>
>
>
> JF
>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2022 at 3:29 AM Abou-Zahra, Shadi <sabouzah@amazon.at>
> wrote:
>
> Hi John, Sheri,
>
>
>
> W3C specs already have a publication date, links to previous versions, an
> errata/history, and description in the title and frontmatter of the
> document. Here are some examples of edited/revised W3C Recommendations:
>
>    - Web Storage: https://www.w3.org/TR/2021/SPSD-webstorage-20210128/
>    - XSL Transformations: https://www.w3.org/TR/xslt20/
>    - HTML 5.1: https://www.w3.org/TR/2021/SPSD-html51-20210128/
>
>
>
> I think this is clear enough, let’s avoid additional complexity with
> version numbers – versioning discussions can become quite challenging, and
> I see no reason to start such a discussion given the robust mechanism that
> W3C already provides.
>
>
>
> Best,
>
>   Shadi
>
>
>
> ---
>
> Shadi Abou-Zahra
>
> Amazon Devices and Services
>
> Principal Accessibility Standards and Policy Manager
>
> ---
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, 21 December, 2022 9:18 PM
> *To:* Sheri Byrne Haber <sbyrnehaber@vmware.com>
> *Cc:* John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>; Alastair Campbell <
> acampbell@nomensa.com>; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
> *Subject:* RE: [EXTERNAL]Removing 4.1.1
>
>
>
> *CAUTION*: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not
> click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know
> the content is safe.
>
>
>
> That would be my understanding as well Sheri.
>
> In fact, I wonder if we should release "newer" versions with new version
> numbers: *WCAG 2.0.1* and *WCAG 2.1.1*, but that is only a suggestion.
> However I think that with new version numbers it makes things slightly
> easier to understand and report to: it removes any ambiguity about which
> version is being referenced.
>
>
>
> JF
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 2:33 PM Sheri Byrne Haber <sbyrnehaber@vmware.com>
> wrote:
>
> I think this implies we need to re-release 2.0/2.2 and do a change
> document for each, correct?
>
>
>
> Sheri
>
>
>
> *From:* John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 21, 2022 9:22 AM
> *To:* Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
> *Cc:* John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
> *Subject:* Re: Removing 4.1.1
>
>
>
> *!! External Email*
>
> Hi Alastair,
>
>
>
> Correct. I am suggesting that as part of the (are we saying
> 'deprecation'?) of that SC, that we include a Note clearly explaining this.
> I'd support an Editor's Note directly inline in the normative document, as
> well as appropriate mention (explanation) in the current (and presumably to
> be updated) Understanding Document associated with that SC.
>
>
>
> JF
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 12:10 PM Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hi John,
>
>
>
> Presumably you mean that for any updates 2.0/2.1?
>
>
>
> Any regs that use 2.2 would then be aligned with that, so there shouldn’t
> be confusion there.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
>
>
> -Alastair
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: *John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>
> *Date: *Wednesday, 21 December 2022 at 17:02
> *To: *Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
> *Cc: *Wilco Fiers <wilco.fiers@deque.com>, Abou-Zahra, Shadi <
> sabouzah@amazon.at>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> *Subject: *Re: Removing 4.1.1
>
> Hi All,
>
>
>
> While I too support the 'retirement' of this SC, it is clear that it MAY
> introduce some confusion with regard to conformance and legal obligations.
>
>
>
> I think that it is critical that as part of retiring 4.1.1 that we make it
> crystal clear in written form that the removal of that Success Criteria
> ONLY impacts the WCAG conformance model, but that legislated requirements
> in different territories MAY still insist that the SC be met, to be in
> alignment with the legislated conformance requirements of those
> territories. I  believe what we need to do is be crystal clear that while
> we've adjusted the Technical Standard, we have no influence or impact on
> the Legislation(s) that use that Standard.
>
> JF
>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 11:25 AM Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
> wrote:
>
> > We think it probably won't be a problem for ISO, 508, EN, etc., but we
> don't know.
>
>
>
> What we do know is how these type of regs typically update.
>
>
>
> Section 508 is still on 2.0. If you are meeting 508, you have to meet what
> they have written down, which is from that dated version of 2.0.
>
> They could go through an internal process to update based on WCAG
> changing, but it is up to them. (How long did people complain about section
> 508 being on version 1.0?)
>
>
>
> The EN is apparently scheduled to be updated next year, so now would be a
> good time to update WCAG (2.2). Again, they have their own version based on
> WCAG 2.1, so it is up to them how they take on changes.
>
>
>
> Apparently, ISO is waiting for 2.2 before doing an update to 40500.
>
>
> > What happens if those can't be updated, or if it takes 5 years? Is
> anyone required to conform to them required to continue testing 4.1.1?
>
>
>
> That is up to the regulations concerned, it isn’t something we control.
> Whether someone is required to comply with a law (and conform to a
> particular standard) will depend on the law.
>
>
>
> For example, if you are a public sector body in the EU, I think you’ll
> need to comply with their current regs until they are updated (i.e. the
> version incorporated into the EN, which includes 4.1.1).
>
>
>
> If you are a commercial organisation without specific regulations/laws,
> you have more flexibility and could use 2.2 and/or ignore 4.1.1 anyway
> (particularly if we remove it from those and/or add a note).
>
>
>
> I think the key word from Shadi’s email (that I just saw), is “cascade”.
> We don’t control every resource, but unless we make the change, the cascade
> doesn’t happen. It is the same for adding SCs.
>
>
>
> If we do make the change, we have a little influence over how hard the
> change is pushed. E.g. removing it from older versions and re-publishing
> those would make it more apparent than only doing so in 2.2. Plus however
> much time WAI (and AG members) wish to put into publicising the change.
>
>
>
> We are in the (privileged) position of starting off a change like that,
> but these type of things always take time to spread out. From a quick
> google, there are plenty of articles for building-regulation updates, we
> aren’t the only ones!
>
>
>
> Kind regards,
>
>
>
> -Alastair
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
> @alastc / www.nomensa.com
> <https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nomensa.com%2F&data=05%7C01%7Csbyrnehaber%40vmware.com%7C1513d83343c84546606608dae378016d%7Cb39138ca3cee4b4aa4d6cd83d9dd62f0%7C0%7C0%7C638072401819570890%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=wUh5y5m6ZjJkP83dPJYCKaoJYUDVMyopJyOIXE4DBOA%3D&reserved=0>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> *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"
>
>
>
> *!! External Email:* This email originated from outside of the
> organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize
> the sender.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> *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"
>
>
>
>
> Amazon Development Center Austria GmbH
> Brueckenkopfgasse 1
> 8020 Graz
> Oesterreich
> Sitz in Graz
> Firmenbuchnummer: FN 439453 f
> Firmenbuchgericht: Landesgericht fuer Zivilrechtssachen Graz
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> *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"
>
>
>
> Amazon Development Center Austria GmbH
> Brueckenkopfgasse 1
> 8020 Graz
> Oesterreich
> Sitz in Graz
> Firmenbuchnummer: FN 439453 f
> Firmenbuchgericht: Landesgericht fuer Zivilrechtssachen Graz
>
>
>

-- 
*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"