Edit comment LC-1246 for Accessibility Guidelines Working Group

Quick access to

Previous: LC-807 Next: LC-1269

Comment LC-1246: Comment Shortname:; Commenter: Henny Swan <henny.swan@rnib.org.uk> on behalf of Royal National Institute of the Blind; Message-id:; Section of the document concerned:

or; Refinement of the section concerned:; Status:
assigned to; Type:; Resolution status:
Response drafted Resolution implemented Reply sent to commenter; Response status:
No response from Commenter yet Commenter approved disposition Commenter objected to disposition
Commenter's response (URI):; Comment:
Comment: "In choosing Web technologies (HTML, scripting, etc.) that will be used when building content, authors need to know what technologies they can assume will be supported by, and active in, the user agents (including assistive technologies) that people with disabilities will be using. If authors rely on technologies that are not supported, then their content may not be accessible."

- "assume" seems like a weak word and one that could provide a loophole, get out clause excuse for not making certain technologies accessible. For example a developer could "assume" that all their users have the latest Flash plug-in, screen reader version etc which may support certain technologies better than earlier versions. While I can understand what the concept of baseline is trying to do - give flexibility where it makes sense - it leaves a back door open. Would it not be an idea for WCAG 2 to recommend a minimum baseline (as the Mobile Web Initiative does in their Best Practises document). This can then be updated by WCAG as and when technologies move on. Alternatively some more substantial advice or guidance should be given to help people set sensible baselines and prevent people abusing the baseline.

- the baseline section explains what it is (although in a slightly difficult to read way) but it gives very scant guidance on setting a baseline. This needs to be substantially developed.

- The text "authors need to know what technologies they can assume will be supported by, and active in, the user agents" infers that this information is available from the software vendor where in reality it is not readily available. How then is a developer best able to "assume" a baseline without thoroughly investigating all access technologies and their ability to support CSS, HTML, Flash, JavaScript et al. Who is responsible for providing this support? Software developers, Government, advocacy groups?; Related issues: (space separated ids); WG Notes: [TEAMA] Discussed in the 19 April 2007 telecon: resolution: Issue 1220, Issue 1246, Issue 1272, Issue 1274, Issue 1314, Issue 1315 (1272 as amended) based on actions. http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2007/04/19-wai-wcag-minutes.html {accept}; Resolution: The conformance section of WCAG2 has been completely rewritten. The term "baseline" has been replaced by "accessibility-supported Web technologies". The issue of what it means to be an accessibility-supported Web technology is addressed in the section "Accessibility Support of Web Technologies" at http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-WCAG20-20070517/#accessibility-support . If individual author must evaluate whether technologies are accessibility supported, this will be a tremendous burden on them. Knowledgeable organizations are encouraged to become centers of expertise on these topics, and to publicize the state of user agent and assistive technology support for different technologies, so that authors can make well-informed choices.; (Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)