Re: CFC - Guidance on Applying WCAG 2.2 to Mobile Applications (WCAG2Mobile)

Expanding on Wilco's 4th point, I think the term "view" is especially
confusing for a document specifically aimed at mobile because "View"
already has a specific technical meaning in both Android UI development
<https://developer.android.com/reference/android/view/View> and iOS UIKit
development
<https://developer.apple.com/documentation/uikit/views-and-controls> which
is very different from the definition being used here. This is one of the
main reasons I have pushed back against the term "view" more generally in
WCAG 3 discussions, but it's especially notable here.

On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 3:29 AM Wilco Fiers <wilco.fiers@deque.com> wrote:

> Hey folks,
> I have a couple questions about this. I'm broadly supportive of this kind
> of effort. Clarity on how to apply WCAG to mobile is important work. But
> there are some things which make me unsure about the precise approach that
> was taken here:
>
> 1. How frequently do we think this document is going to need to be updated
> to keep it current? Mobile technologies change fairly rapidly. Why did the
> group choose a working group note for this? These are generally not used
> for things that need regular maintenance, which it seems like this would
> need.
>
> 2. If a note is the best way to do this, I'm wondering whether it wouldn't
> be better to incorporate this work into WCAG2ICT. This document seems a
> little odd to me, it essentially adds notes on top of WCAG2ICT, which
> itself is a document that adds notes on top of WCAG 2.2. Is there a good
> reason for this to be its own document, other than it is created by a
> different task force? It seems like how we organize the task forces
> shouldn't dictate which documents we have. The other way around seems more
> appropriate.
>
> 3. Which operating systems are considered for this guidance? Having asked
> TF participants this seems to be all about Android and iOS. While those are
> certainly dominant in the US, that's not reflective of the international
> market. To what extent does this guidance apply to HarmonyOS or Ubuntu
> Touch for example? Guidance for Android and iOS is valuable, but if that's
> the current scope of the work I feel that should be much clearer, including
> in the document's name. I also wonder how this applies to tablet-only
> operating systems such as ChromeOS and SteamOS. Can we get some clarity on
> this?
>
> 4. Why did the group choose to use WCAG 3.0's "view" definition? This is
> something that is actively being worked on, and so any change can alter the
> meaning of WCAG2Mobile guidance. It would seem better for this document had
> its own definition of view. Those could then be helpful input for WCAG 3.0.
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 4:39 PM Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Call For Consensus — ends Monday March 24th at Mid-day Boston time.
>>
>>
>>
>> The Mobile Accessibility Task Force would like to publish the *First
>> Public* Working Draft of “Guidance on Applying WCAG 2.2 to Mobile
>> (WCAG2Mobile)”
>>
>> https://w3c.github.io/matf/
>>
>>
>>
>> Call minutes: https://www.w3.org/2024/12/10-ag-minutes.html#851d
>>
>> (There was also a pre-CFC:
>> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2025JanMar/0060.html )
>>
>>
>>
>> Since the pre-CFC the only change has been to adjust the name of the
>> document (adding “applications”).
>>
>>
>>
>> If you have concerns about this proposed consensus position that have not
>> been discussed already and feel that those concerns result in you not being
>> able to accept this decision, please let the group know before the CfC
>> deadline.
>>
>>
>>
>> Kind regards,
>>
>>
>>
>> -Alastair
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>> alastairc.uk / www.nomensa.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *Wilco Fiers*
> Director accessibility automation - W3C AC representative - Facilitator
> ACT Task Force
>
>
>