Requirements/Analysis and changelog for Relationship Between MWBP & WCAG

Page Contents

Purpose, Goals, Objectives
Audience
Use Cases
Approach
Notes
Consider for later version
References
Changelog
Archive

Latest Drafts:

Editor's Draft Relationship between Mobile Web Best Practices 1.0 and Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
Intro doc: Web Content Accessibility and Mobile Web: Making a Web Site Accessible Both for People with Disabilities and for Mobile Devices
Editor's Draft Experiences Shared by People with Disabilities and by People Using Mobile Devices (Experiences table version)

Purpose, Goals, Objectives

Strengthen the business case for doing each (accessibility and mobile best practices) by showing how it benefits the other [Overview document, Experiences document, Presentation]
Spread awareness of mobile best practices to people who already aware of accessibility issues, and vice-versa: spread awareness of accessibility to people who already aware of mobile best practices. [Overview document, Presentation]
Describe the overlaps and synergy between WCAG 1.0 and MWBP
- At an abstract and introductory level, for policy makers [Overview document, Experiences document]
- At a per-checkpoint or best practice level, for implementors [Technical documents]
Encourage adoption of other guidelines/best practices by those who have a adopted one, primarily by showing that you are already well on your way to meeting one by having met the other [Overview document, Technical documents, Presentation]
- Help decision-makers figure out how much effort is required for compliance with a second set of guidelines [Technical documents]
Explain the relationship between device limitations as basis for MWBP and user limitations as basis for WCAG [Experiences document]

Note: These documents are not about how to make mobile-aware content accessible, that is, accessible to people with disabilities use mobile devices, as that should be covered by WCAG, especially 2.0.

Audience

Primary audiences:

Policy makers and project managers considering adopting one or both sets of guidelines, especially who already have adopted one of them
Developers who have already adopted one set of guidelines and are going to work on the other
People who work in one field and are curious about the other, or would like to leverage their existing knowledge to work in the other
Anyone wanting to understand the relationships between the sets of guidelines and their basis in devices and users

Approach

(Updated $Date: 2008/07/24 15:15:42 $)

Previous versions of the technical documents answered two questions:

How does [each Mobile Best Practice] especially help users with disabilities? /
How does [each WCAG Checkpoint or Success Criteria] especially help mobile users?
Does [each Mobile Best Practice] help meet any WCAG Checkpoint/Success Criteria? /
Does [each WCAG Checkpoint or Success Criteria] give me MWBP compliance?

In the 28 March teleconference and e-mail discussions, EOWG agreed that the documents were too long and complicated, and discussed a finer focus to simplify the documents for users. Additionally, we would like to manage the workload on both EOWG and MWI BPWG, and get some of the documents completed soon.

After discussions with the editors and chairs, we propose the following re-structuring, re-scoping, and re-prioritizing.

First, complete the following documents:

Overview Doc Web Content Accessibility and Mobile Web: Making a Web Site Accessible Both for People with Disabilities and for Mobile Devices (WAI Resource) -
introduces the concept, and meets the needs of people just needing an overview
Experiences Doc Experiences Shared by People with Disabilities and by People Using Mobile Devices (WAI Resource)
Technical Doc Editor's Draft Relationship between Mobile Web Best Practices 1.0 and Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (W3C Working Group Note) - has the following sub-pages:
- Mobile and accessibility together: Shows How MWBP 1.0 and WCAG 2.0 are Related
- From mobile towards accessibility: For those who have implemented MWBP 1.0 and want to learn about
  - WCAG 2.0, see From MWBP 1.0 to WCAG 2.0
  - WCAG 1.0, see From MWBP 1.0 to WCAG 1.0
- From accessibility towards mobile: If you have implemented WCAG and want to learn about MWBP 1.0:
  - If you have done WCAG 2.0, see From WCAG 2.0 to MWBP 1.0
  - If you have done WCAG 1.0, see From WCAG 1.0 to MWBP 1.0
These would have the following information, for example in the Draft restructuring of From MWBP 1.0 to WCAG 2.0:
- Summary of work required to make content that meets MWBP also meet WCAG 2.0 - simple lists of Nothing, Something, Everything; within each list, ordered by level
- Addressing WCAG 2.0 Success Criteria - organized by SC number (and thus topic); includes short instructions on what is needed to comply with WCAG 2.0 in relation to what is already done for MWBP, and the full SC text linked to the Quick Reference (which lists techniques).
  QUESTION: Should it list all SC so that people can use this as a comprehensive list? Or, should this section include only the ones in the "Something" category in order to keep it short & focused?
[discuss priority] Short presentation on Mobile-Accessibility overlap - note that we will have a starter from Henny & Shawn after 25 April

Secondarily, after completing the documents above, prioritize completing the drafts below:

How WCAG 2.0 Can Help All Mobile Web Users
How WCAG 1.0 Can Help All Mobile Web Users
How MWBP 1.0 Can Help Users With Disabilities

Path to Publication

The following are steps to complete the first set of documents, along with projected timeframes:

	Editors	MWBP	EOWG	Other
Approve restructing	done	done	done
Restructure documents with existing content & minimal additional work	done	—	—
Approve for publication as updated Working Drafts	—	done	done	Domain Leads
Complete content	July	—	—
Review completed documents	—	July-Aug	July-Aug	WCAG WG, WAI PFWG
Approve for publication as [final WG Note, or updated Working Draft?]	?	?	?	Domain Leads
? additional public review cycle needed ? at least plan to address any comments taht come in

Use Cases

Primary use cases for the detailed documents(s):

I know WCAG 1.0 and now I also want to do MWBP.
I know MWBP, and now I also want to do WCAG 2.0.
I haven't done much with either accessibility or designing for mobile devices, and now I want to do both.

An example persona and scenario/use case:

I am a Web developer (or project manager)
I have a pretty good understanding of MWBP, and my web site meets most of the BPs
We're doing some updating to our site, and want to make it more accessible, preferably to meet WCAG

Has these needs:

I want to know:
1. which WCAG success criteria (SC) I've already got covered by meeting MWBP
2. which WCAG SC I've partially got covered but need to do a little more on, or that I might already have covered but need to check
3. which WCAG SC are not at all addressed by MWBP
I'd really like to get a quick overview of how much is in the three categories (1,2,3 above), probably as lists
Then I'd like to get a concise bit of info on the #2 items, telling my just what else to check to see if I need to do more to meet WCAG. I want this to be short, quick, and clear.
I might want to look into more details on a couple of points, but I don't want that to clutter the simple material (e.g., it's linked to elsewhere)

Additional use cases that the extended documents might address:

A stakeholder has achieved compliance with one recommendation and now aims for compliance with the other. The document might explain what additional effort is required and how to leverage existing investment to comply with the other recommendation efficiently.
A stakeholder is confused about, or is unaware of, the relationship between WCAG and Mobile Web Best Practices, seeing them as separate and disjoint, and missing the synergy and the overlap between them. The document might explain how they are similar and how they differ, and that the development and evaluation processes are similar.
A content provider is complying with one Recommendation and is aware of similarities with the other. The organization is aware that it can improve usability for all by complying with the corresponding checkpoints or best practices of the other Recommendation (partial compliance) with only a little further effort, but needs to know how to do this. The document might provide information about how to comply, with minimal effort, with the corresponding CPs or BPs of the other Recommendation (union of the two sets).
A content provider is committed to compliance with one Recommendation and needs to know the cost of compliance with the other, doing both together. The document might clarify what added effort would be required (difference between the two sets).
A content provider wishes to comply with both Recommendations on the same project, as part of a comprehensive content quality strategy, and wishes to integrate the requirements. The document might provide a single coherent, integrated overview of both.
A company is developing an evaluation or repair tool (checker). It has developed a tool for one recommendation and is concerned not to waste resources writing new code unnecessarily. It wishes to reuse or adapt code from the existing tool and needs to know how WCAG and MWBP relate to each other as regards testing.
A trainer is giving a course on Web accessibility to a group of mobile Web specialists (or vice versa) and wishes (a) to understand accessibility in the mobile context and (b) avoid repeating information the students already know.
A disability advocacy group is arguing for adoption of WCAG for a mobile-aware Web site. The site owners have produced the counter-argument that it would entail undue hardship and effort. The group needs evidence that many WCAG checkpoints have already been partially complied with and that only a small further effort is needed.
A policy maker and a guideline writer are producing comprehensive requirements for Websites and wish to require accessibility and mobile awareness but are confused about the relationship between the Recommendations. They need to understand the relationships and synergies involved.

Notes

Organization of the Work

The documents are produced jointly by the Mobile Web Best Practices Working Group and the WAI Education and Outreach Working Group. The technical draft is published in the MWBP space. Being a member of both groups, Alan Chuter will liaise between the two groups, with Shawn Henry and Jo Rabin, as chairs of the groups coordinating the work plan.

Technical doc open Issues:

ACTION: Alan for final edit - scan for repetition/overlap between sections [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/11/06-eo-minutes.html#action08]
ACTION: Alan consider a way to point people who will be looking at this offline to the other documents (that they might also want to print or download) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/11/23-eo-minutes.html#action02]
ACTION: Alan explore providing ability to select either WCAG 1.0 or WCAG 2.0 or both (e.g., like customizability of the WCAG 2.0 Quick Reference) [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2007/11/23-eo-minutes.html#action01]

Consider for later version

A short presentation
How and why people with disabilities use mobile devices for Web access: Gather user stories. To motivate people to read the document and understand why it is important.

References

Previous drafts listed under Changelog below.

Discussions:

Related documents :

Changelog

Changelog for the technical document is on a separate Web page.

Experiences document: 15 July 2008 version

NOTE: CSS changes need to be fixed across browsers

Additional changes on 17 July (without changing the version date):

changed "process(es)." to "processes."
in footer, added after editors' names, their W3C-member affiliation

First round of changes:

table version formatting:
- removed table widths from CSS and margin-left
- changed <th width="10%"> to <th width="15%"> (and WCAG 1.0 to 5%
- removed underscores (_) from MWBP handles to improve line breaks and balance table widths
- added <p> within table cells for consistent spacing visually
- td, th {
  padding-left: 10px;
  padding-right: 5px;
  }
linear version formatting:
- added down arrow to contents list
- added "top contents list" links
added button-like option for [Table version | Linear version] (which is used in the tools pages).
in other option, bolded current one in [Table version | Linear version]
updated date

Experiences document: 14 July 2008 version

Updated the menu at the top. It was [This version: table | Alternative version: linear] and now it is [Table version | Linear version]
In the table version, changed the table width to 100%
Removed repeated *WCAG 1.0 CP*, WCAG 2.0 SC and MWBP 1.0*
Updated the introduction of the linear version so it is consistent with the table version
Deleted "related resources" section from the linear version as those resources are already listed in the introduction
Grouped barriers into four: Perceivable, Operable, Understandable and Robust
Updated introductions in both versions to talk about the grouping aspect
Added section headings for these principles and defined these terms
In the table version, created separate tables for each principle.
In the linear version, created sections for each principle.

Experiences document: 21 July 2008 version

Text for mobile context and disability context were permuted so fixed that;
In the linear version, Updated the way checkpoints, success criteria and best practices are listed;
Added success criteria number of Keyboard (No exception);
Fixed spelling mistakes;
In the table version, added "checkpoint", "success criteria" and "best practice" to the column headings in each table;
Updated the second parag. in both versions;
Added "contents" H2 to the linear version;
Added a table of contents to the table version;
Updated both versions so the links to http://www.w3.org/WAI/mobile point to the latest version;
Updated both versions so that links to "Understanding WCAG 2.0" points to the latest version;
Updated both documents to link to the latest version of the "http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/quickref/";
Changed this sentence "Screen has limited color palette..." to "Many screens have...";
Updated this sentence "User only sees small areas at a time ("keyhole view"), unable to..." to "User only sees small areas at a time ("keyhole view") or cannot access picture details because they are shrunk, unable to..."
Update this sentence "In noisy place (street, nightclub) can't hear." to "Users often cannot hear in noisy (street, nightclub) or in public places (trains, hotel lobbies)";
Updated this sentence "Often no CSS support by mobile browser." to "Often no CSS support or diverging CSS support by mobile browser.";
Updated this sentence "User can not determine purpose of link" to "User can not determine purpose of link when read out of context";
Updated this sentence "User who is deaf or hard of hearing can't operate content" to "User who is deaf or hard of hearing can't perceive content";
Changed "misses warnings" to "misses prompts".

Experiences document: 24 July 2008 version

Changed the title as "Shared Web Experiences: Barriers Common to Mobile Device Users and People with Disabilities";
Added intra-links to the four accessibility principles;
Formatted TOC with CSS so the lists are visually nested under the four principles.

Site Navigation