Re: Writing about WCAG 3 updates and anxiety-based disabilities

Rachael,

I think we need to emphasize with anyone that writes about it that there needs to be an emphasized introduction, just like you’ve said here.

The one change I’d recommend is that it be prioritized. For example, it should have a heading at the next level down from the primary heading for the article, so it isn’t missed. It could also have a treatment to make it emphasized. My sense is it is primarily anxiety-based reactions that are struggling with the articles.

Thank you,
Jen


From: Bradley Montgomery, Rachael L <rmontgomery@loc.gov>
Date: Thursday, May 23, 2024 at 7:47 AM
To: Jennison Asuncion <jasuncion@linkedin.com>, Jennifer Strickland <jstrickland@mitre.org>, Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, Silver TF <public-silver@w3.org>
Subject: [EXT] Re: Writing about WCAG 3 updates and anxiety-based disabilities
Jennison, There is an explanatory editor's note at the beginning of the guidelines as well as the introduction. All, I'm adding the question of "What more we can do to alleviate concerns while remaining transparent?" to our retrospective

Jennison,

There is an explanatory editor's note at the beginning of the guidelines as well as the introduction.

All,

I'm adding the question of "What more we can do to alleviate concerns while remaining transparent?" to our retrospective for TPAC.

In the meantime, I encourage members to repeat the message from the introduction and the editor's notes whenever you are in a  conversation where concerns are raised.

They key points of our messaging are:

  *   The final set of outcomes in WCAG 3 will be different than what is in this draft.

     *   Outcomes will be added, combined, and removed.

     *   We  expect changes to the text of the Outcomes.

     *   Only some of the Outcomes will be required at the base level of conformance.

  *   The purpose of publishing this initial list is to:

     *   better understand the scope of needs,
     *   request assistance in identifying gaps, and
     *   request assistance locating and conducting research to validate or invalidate the outcomes listed.
Kind regards,

Rachael
________________________________
From: Jennison Asuncion <jasuncion@linkedin.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2024 5:58 PM
To: Jennifer Strickland <jstrickland@mitre.org>; Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>; Silver TF <public-silver@w3.org>
Subject: RE: Writing about WCAG 3 updates and anxiety-based disabilities


CAUTION: This email message has been received from an external source. Please use caution when opening attachments, or clicking on links.

Thanks Jennifer for raising this. I’ve heard from a few non-a11y folk who took a look (and keep in mind, not everyone is going to read the preamble/intro material) and expressed concern over the sheer volume of outcomes. While I tried my best to assure them this is a working draft which will go under change over time, there was certainly reaction.



I realize there’s  nothing to do about it at this point, but going forward, it will be important to reinforce the evolving nature of the outcomes in the communication. I’m assuming that there is explanatory text right at the start of the listing of outcomes.



Jennison



From: Jennifer Strickland <jstrickland@mitre.org>
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2024 2:50 PM
To: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org; Silver TF <public-silver@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Writing about WCAG 3 updates and anxiety-based disabilities



Yes, there’s another source that didn’t quite provide the same emphasis.



I suggest that we recommend that all AGWG members put a very straightforward and emphasized section at the beginning that includes that editor’s note.





From: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com<mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com>>
Date: Wednesday, May 22, 2024 at 5:44 PM
To: Jennifer Strickland <jstrickland@mitre.org<mailto:jstrickland@mitre.org>>, w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org> <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>, Silver TF <public-silver@w3.org<mailto:public-silver@w3.org>>
Subject: [EXT] Re: Writing about WCAG 3 updates and anxiety-based disabilities

Hi Jennifer, That is something we were concerned about before it went out, and so the official communications included things like: The introduction https: //www. w3. org/TR/wcag3/#introduction “The list of outcomes is longer than a listing of



Hi Jennifer,



That is something we were concerned about before it went out, and so the official communications included things like:



The introduction https://www.w3.org/TR/wcag3/#introduction<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.w3.org/TR/wcag3/*introduction__;Iw!!EDx7F7x-0XSOB8YS_BQ!YTiQ8DjD0Ni0UAUUBvpfENpDo0xy3TzWqeUV_rDN-CaoScRRv3FS9trxUDI40YQl_VJjLe0tB-gMpBFcEF6cgFU$>

“The list of outcomes is longer than a listing of Success Criteria in WCAG 2.2 because the intent at this stage is to be as inclusive as possible of potential outcomes.”



The editor’s note right above the new outcomes:

https://www.w3.org/TR/wcag3/#issue-container-generatedID<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.w3.org/TR/wcag3/*issue-container-generatedID__;Iw!!EDx7F7x-0XSOB8YS_BQ!YTiQ8DjD0Ni0UAUUBvpfENpDo0xy3TzWqeUV_rDN-CaoScRRv3FS9trxUDI40YQl_VJjLe0tB-gMpBFc8_anexo$>

“Please consider all items in the list as exploratory at this point. It is a list of all possible topics for consideration. Not all items listed will become requirements.”



The announcement:

https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-announce/2024AprJun/0001.html<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wai-announce/2024AprJun/0001.html__;!!EDx7F7x-0XSOB8YS_BQ!YTiQ8DjD0Ni0UAUUBvpfENpDo0xy3TzWqeUV_rDN-CaoScRRv3FS9trxUDI40YQl_VJjLe0tB-gMpBFcT5ldcrw$>

“This draft includes *potential *outcomes that we are exploring. The final set of outcomes in WCAG 3 will be different from this draft. Outcomes will be edited, added, combined, and removed.”



The introduction:

https://www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/wcag/wcag3-intro/#for-your-review<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.w3.org/WAI/standards-guidelines/wcag/wcag3-intro/*for-your-review__;Iw!!EDx7F7x-0XSOB8YS_BQ!YTiQ8DjD0Ni0UAUUBvpfENpDo0xy3TzWqeUV_rDN-CaoScRRv3FS9trxUDI40YQl_VJjLe0tB-gMpBFcOAUyYfM$>

“Please consider the following questions when reviewing the outcomes in this draft:

  *   What outcomes needed to make web content accessible are missing?
  *   What research supports or refutes these outcomes?
  *   Are any of these outcomes out of scope for accessibility standards? If so, please explain why.”



Some of the unofficial articles included useful statements about the outcomes as well.

  *   Rachael’s post on social media https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7196737641034190848/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7196737641034190848/__;!!EDx7F7x-0XSOB8YS_BQ!YTiQ8DjD0Ni0UAUUBvpfENpDo0xy3TzWqeUV_rDN-CaoScRRv3FS9trxUDI40YQl_VJjLe0tB-gMpBFciLHgYds$>
  *   Third party articles also noted it https://www.deque.com/blog/w3c-unveils-174-new-outcomes-for-wcag-3-0/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.deque.com/blog/w3c-unveils-174-new-outcomes-for-wcag-3-0/__;!!EDx7F7x-0XSOB8YS_BQ!YTiQ8DjD0Ni0UAUUBvpfENpDo0xy3TzWqeUV_rDN-CaoScRRv3FS9trxUDI40YQl_VJjLe0tB-gMpBFcADVZelk$>



Is there different phrasing that people need, or are they finding out about WCAG 3 updates from different sources?



Kind regards,



-Alastair



PS. I wasn’t familiar with “BLUF”. The first result in google was interesting, but once I got past the “Breeches and Leather Uniform Fanclub” I found a useful result.







From: Jennifer Strickland

Hello fellow AGWG and WCAG 3 / Silver folks,

I’d like to raise a topic for consideration.

BLUF:
When we write about WCAG 3, might we recommend / provide a disclaimer or note of emphasis at the outset that we expect a lot more work to be done and the material in the article / post should not be viewed as indicative of the final state?

For example, the recent working draft is still expected to undergo many revisions.

The reason I raise this is many people in the tech community with disabilities who do not participate in the W3C are expressing stress and overwhelm at the 174 new outcomes. People have expressed distress, hopelessness, and a lack of confidence at the communicated direction, only because it isn’t communicated clearly that the 174 new outcomes are not necessarily representative of the final output.

There are a variety of cognitive / neuro / trauma disabilities that hear this news and experience a state of hyper-arousal, panic, and reactivity. I know AGWG hopes to be inclusive of the range of disability and this is an area that was not well-known in past work. This disability community is especially distressed at the idea of 174 new outcomes, so communicating that this is expected to undergo more revision will help to alleviate that anxiety.

Thank you,
Jen

Jennifer Strickland (they/them, she/her)

Senior Human Centered Accessibility Engineer

Collaboration Solutions (L178)
The MITRE Corporation

Email: jstrickland@mitre.org<mailto:jstrickland@mitre.org>

Cell: 571-319-2230