Re: Survey for WCAG3 detailed requirements

Hi Wilco,

There are 9 in favour (the extra one was due to needing to comment), 2 fairly close variations, and:

  *   A suggestion for documenting goals and objectives overall (which we can look at as part of the explainer).
  *   Your list of 10 questions.

The chairs concluded this is sufficient for consensus purposes, given that it is “meta” work (work about the work).

The purpose of this exercise is to organise our work, capturing the direction for how we will meet the WCAG3 requirements.

The questions your raised are useful to ask as we work through more details on the solutions, but trying to document them all now would detour the group from the work of creating the solutions.

As we move conformance related solutions from exploratory to developing we can explore applying these questions.

Kind regards,

-Alastair

--

alastairc.uk<https://alastairc.uk/> / www.thisisgain.com<http://www.nomensa.com/>




From: Wilco Fiers
Hey Alastair,
Apologies if this wasn't clear. I wasn't asking to discuss the goals. I was asking to discuss the structure we use to write goals before we discuss the goals themselves. You asked the group for feedback, out of 15 respondents only 8 said they thought the structure would work. That suggests (to me) there is no consensus on using this format. Is the intent to move forward with this format despite that, or is there some plan for discussing the format later?

On Mon, Jun 2, 2025 at 2:37 PM Alastair Campbell <alastair.campbell@thisisgain.com<mailto:alastair.campbell@thisisgain.com>> wrote:
Hi Wilco,

As I said before:
> We will be going through each item individually to refine the wording and apply a timeline.

Assertions are first.

The survey was to resolve what we call these things internally. We kinda got stuck on nomenclature, which didn’t seem like a great use of meeting time.

Kind regards,

-Alastair

PS. Apologies to all for the odd “footer” at the top of my previous email. Based on that blooper I’ve managed to opt-out of the company auto-sig. I think.


From: Wilco Fiers <wilco.fiers@deque.com<mailto:wilco.fiers@deque.com>>
Date: Monday, 2 June 2025 at 13:01
To: Alastair Campbell <alastair.campbell@thisisgain.com<mailto:alastair.campbell@thisisgain.com>>
Cc: WCAG list <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
Subject: Re: Survey for WCAG3 detailed requirements
You don't often get email from wilco.fiers@deque.com<mailto:wilco.fiers@deque.com>. Learn why this is important<https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification>
Hey Alastair,

> As we have not completely worked through the solutions, it would be premature to answer questions such as how much effort a solution requires from authors, or what the risks/uncertainties are. These are good questions to document, either in editorial notes or in the WCAG3 explainer.  In our next charter we will include a commitment to doing this as the solutions are finalized.

Estimating and risk management seems like pretty fundamental project management work to me. There are various ways you could do estimating of this work. If there are a lot of unknowns, all that means is that you have a large margin of error, that then becomes one of the risks of that particular goal.

I think this needs to be on the AGWG agenda soon. Surely you asked us to fill out this survey so that we could come to some sort of shared approach on how to improve on WCAG 3.0 goals. So then let's discuss these points where we disagree so we can come to a shared understanding.

On Mon, Jun 2, 2025 at 10:07 AM Alastair Campbell <alastair.campbell@thisisgain.com<mailto:alastair.campbell@thisisgain.com>> wrote:
Alastair Campbell
Director of Accessibility
E:
alastair.campbell@thisisgain.com<mailto:alastair.campbell@thisisgain.com>
[Gain. Creativity, Data, Technology. ThisIsGain.com]<https://uk.content.exclaimer.net/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thisisgain.com%2F&tenantid=QreU1CWZEfCl72BFvdJqtQ&templateid=202cb1c2d325f011a5ef6045bdd26ab5&excomponentid=R4dG91vpY2x-Ib9rS3gEbIT6dRRdt6k9mKCw8Ka5zso&excomponenttype=Image&signature=FXPPllj7RYLB6JmXgr-d7ewRgOJpbH8b6rO9CT6sTdVznRwiQfkySP8fNC0NAftHcPcGETNxB-Pape1QtbkOwGc8RMpsd9tNDMNSKC_8x-Y2KsXMac7eV-s5fv6YmP9W_lrEE4P73UbgnD59C1KLMTqf9JJ8FjSL4_CFaunLhgErGC-MNcMr0iZ1Ifq3BBpIQhzRvue30zemNUKxdrQ3O7ETkzTdRu7wHshxw-evwPkxWOxCg5FyUHrMNxnTJj43t-gIq3EHndM_dJ6acG5R4-V5fBod5tUujyzk997yn4Hduh7IoPsoc23nWM4T6G0oW_-PysTPhxcma7R1FjLN2A&v=1&imprintMessageId=1a299e59-090e-4fb5-b258-59b8c81848eb>


Hi everyone,



We (the chairs) wanted to follow up on the discussion from the last meeting, which was about:



Writing a list of criteria/approaches for how we will meet the Requirements documents for WCAG 3<https://www.w3.org/TR/wcag-3.0-requirements/#requirements>.



There was a question about what we call these (internally to the group). Based on the survey<https://www.w3.org/wbs/35422/Naming_convention/results/>, we're going with "Requirements Checkpoints". This is an internal name for us to use when referencing them, and is not for general public consumption.



The purpose of these more detailed requirements for WCAG3 is to organise our work. We will be going through each item individually to refine the wording and apply a timeline.



In response to some of the comments in the survey:



The comment on structure is reasonable, but these are requirements for WCAG3, not the accessibility requirements in WCAG3.



The problems we are solving are coming from the requirements document, which came from the Silver group's research.



The suggested solutions are the consensus solutions of the working group. We've discussed many solutions; these are the ones the group has thought most appropriate.



As we have not completely worked through the solutions, it would be premature to answer questions such as how much effort a solution requires from authors, or what the risks/uncertainties are. These are good questions to document, either in editorial notes or in the WCAG3 explainer.  In our next charter we will include a commitment to doing this as the solutions are finalized.



Kind regards,



-Alastair




--
Wilco Fiers
Director accessibility automation - W3C AC representative - Facilitator ACT Task Force
Error! Filename not specified.



--
Wilco Fiers
Director accessibility automation - W3C AC representative - Facilitator ACT Task Force
[cid:BCBD7D4B-677E-4B95-AE3F-60005DBD9EE4]