Re: CFC - WCAG 3 explainer and requirements

+1

From: Alastair Campbell <alastair.campbell@thisisgain.com>
Date: Tuesday, February 24, 2026 at 9:19 AM
To: Julie Romanowski <julie@knowbility.org>, MURATA Makoto <founder@info-a11y.jp>
Cc: WCAG list <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: Re: CFC - WCAG 3 explainer and requirements

CAUTION:EXTERNAL EMAIL SENDER!

Hi Julie,

Internationalisation review(s) are a core part of the W3C process (in the horizontal review process<https://www.w3.org/guide/documentreview/#how-to-get-horizontal-review>), which is also called out in our group’s charter<https://raw.githack.com/w3c/charter-drafts/agwg-update-2025/2025/ag-wg.html>. As a group we have committed to building that in as we work on WCAG3.

We also have several editor’s notes in the draft WCAG 3 draft highlighting areas of work for and with internionalization.

The question here is: What should go into the explainer document?

As WCAG 3 is updated to incorporate aspects of internationalisation (e.g. implementing the registries), that would be a suitable thing to add. However, as we haven’t done that yet, I’m not sure what to add to the explainer.

Kind regards,

-Alastair


From: Julie Romanowski <julie@knowbility.org>
Date: Tuesday, 24 February 2026 at 13:59
To: MURATA Makoto <founder@info-a11y.jp>
Cc: WCAG list <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: Re: CFC - WCAG 3 explainer and requirements

Hi, Makoto. I am interested in hearing more about why you believe internationalization should be included.

On Mon, Feb 23, 2026 at 7:44 PM MURATA Makoto <founder@info-a11y.jp<mailto:founder@info-a11y.jp>> wrote:
-1 since internationalization (including the lack of I18N in WCAG 2) is not mentioned.  Even the draft charter provides much more information about I18N.

Regards,
MURATA Makoto

2026年2月24日(火) 7:10 Alastair Campbell <alastair.campbell@thisisgain.com<mailto:alastair.campbell@thisisgain.com>>:
Call For Consensus — ends 2nd March 2026 at midday Boston time.

The update is to publish updates to:

  *
WCAG 3 explainer (https://w3c.github.io/wcag3/explainer/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://w3c.github.io/wcag3/explainer/__;!!EDx7F7x-0XSOB8YS_BQ!dtF1XfBpH1cZfkKLBYd1KlbtWXkv6eLmjXNkEx988htp2ES_v0woMAss9aNomY2gJgeTjRbVW76u8uo$>), and
  *
WCAG 3 Requirements (https://w3c.github.io/wcag3/requirements/<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://w3c.github.io/wcag3/requirements/__;!!EDx7F7x-0XSOB8YS_BQ!dtF1XfBpH1cZfkKLBYd1KlbtWXkv6eLmjXNkEx988htp2ES_v0woMAss9aNomY2gJgeTjRbVoT8JM8U$>)

This CFC does not replace the existing CFC for the working draft<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2026JanMar/0079.html__;!!EDx7F7x-0XSOB8YS_BQ!dtF1XfBpH1cZfkKLBYd1KlbtWXkv6eLmjXNkEx988htp2ES_v0woMAss9aNomY2gJgeTjRbVOeAwH5o$>.

Updates to the explainer bring it in line with the current working draft for WCAG 3.
Explainer diff<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://services.w3.org/htmldiff?doc1=https:**Awww.w3.org*TR*wcag-3.0-explainer*&doc2=https:**Adeploy-preview-585--wcag3.netlify.app*explainer*__;Ly8vLy8vLy8v!!EDx7F7x-0XSOB8YS_BQ!dtF1XfBpH1cZfkKLBYd1KlbtWXkv6eLmjXNkEx988htp2ES_v0woMAss9aNomY2gJgeTjRbVpFTDvX8$>

Updates to the requirements were minimal to fix a broken link.
Requirements diff<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://services.w3.org/htmldiff?doc1=https:**Awww.w3.org*TR*wcag-3.0-requirements*&doc2=https:**Adeploy-preview-585--wcag3.netlify.app*requirements*__;Ly8vLy8vLy8v!!EDx7F7x-0XSOB8YS_BQ!dtF1XfBpH1cZfkKLBYd1KlbtWXkv6eLmjXNkEx988htp2ES_v0woMAss9aNomY2gJgeTjRbVeDbQZl4$>

To support the CFC please reply to the group with a “+1”.

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 reply with a “-1” and explanation before the CfC deadline.

Kind regards,



AG Chairs