Edit comment LC-2663 for Accessibility Guidelines Working Group

Previous: LC-2673 Next: LC-2690

Comment LC-2663: Comment Shortname:; Commenter: Duff Johnson <djohnson@commonlook.com>; Message-id:; Section of the document concerned:

or; Refinement of the section concerned:; Status:
assigned to; Type:; Comment:
NOTE: While my affiliations are provided for purposes of disclosure this Comment is my own and does not represent the views of those organizations.

OVERVIEW

The WCAG2ICT begins with an un-argued assumption: that guidelines written carefully, deliberately and specifically for web content and technologies are reasonable candidates for evaluating accessibility in “non-Web ICT”.

From this dubious basis the document’s Abstract claims that it will provide information on “how” WCAG 2.0 can be applied to non-Web content. The document’s Introduction goes on to advise that the document will “…help clarify how to use WCAG 2.0”.

Unfortunately, the document does not perform these self-appointed functions whatsoever. Instead, it prefers to simply claim (in most cases) that WCAG 2.0’s Success Criteria may be applied “directly as written” without any suggestion as to “how”.

I’m extremely disappointed. Not only does the WCAG2ICT fail to address its own stated objectives, but reveals in stark terms that W3C has no business going “off-web” in standards development.

I’ve provided details on some of my concerns below.; Related issues: LC-2664 LC-2665 LC-2666 LC-2667 LC-2668 LC-2669 LC-2670 LC-2671 LC-2672 LC-2673 LC-2674
(space separated ids); WG Notes:; Proposed Resolution: We are unsure of what you are referring to as "an un-argued assumption: that guidelines written carefully, deliberately and specifically for web content and technologies are reasonable candidates for evaluating accessibility in “non-Web ICT”." We are unable to find any such language or similar language in the introduction. In any case, this was not our assumption. The W3C is responding with informative guidance to the suggestion by the US Access Board and EU M376 standards development team that WCAG 2.0 be used as a standard for non-web ICT. The WCAG2ICT task force was formed to look at WCAG 2.0 to see how terms should be interpreted, how the success criteria should be applied, etc. to carry the WCAG 2.0 intent over to non-web ICT. The task force’s scope is limited by the work statement and as such, we cannot make changes to the normative parts of WCAG 2.0 (e.g. the success criteria, terminology definitions, or techniques). You can view our work statement at http://www.w3.org/2012/04/WCAG2ICT-WorkStatement.html. ================== [WCAG WG] Comments ============== ADDITION TO END Please note the introduction to WCAG2ICT points out (in Paragraphs 7 and 2) that " This document does not seek to determine which WCAG 2.0 provisions (principles, guidelines, or success criteria) should or should not apply to non-web ICT, but rather how they would apply, if applied." also that " Although this document covers a wide range of issues, it is not able to address all the needs of all people with disabilities. Because WCAG 2.0 was developed for the Web, addressing accessibility for non-Web documents and software may involve provisions beyond those included in this document. Authors and developers are encouraged to seek relevant advice about current best practices to ensure that non-Web documents and software are accessible, as far as possible, to people with disabilities."; (Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)