W3C

Site Navigation

Nearby

Results of Questionnaire Status Level Names

The results of this questionnaire are available to anybody.

This questionnaire was open from 2022-02-10 to 2022-02-15.

8 answers have been received.

Jump to results for question:

Status Level Names
Levels assigned to Working Draft

1. Status Level Names

We discussed names for the status levels at the 09 November 2021 meeting. We then solicited the COGA taskforce's input to finalize the names.

The levels that resulted from those conversations are:

Placeholder,
Exploratory,
Developing,
Refining, and
Mature.

The levels are documented in the AG Process.

We are bringing the COGA agreed-upon names back to the joint working group for final approval. Having discussed this at length, we ask you disagree only if you have a major concern.

Do you:

Summary

Choice	All responders
Choice	Results
Agree with the wording	7
Disagree with the wording (list reason for objection in comment)	1

Details

Responder	Status Level Names	Comments
Rachael Bradley Montgomery	Agree with the wording
Laura Carlson	Agree with the wording
Jennifer Delisi	Agree with the wording
Wilco Fiers	Agree with the wording
Bruce Bailey	Disagree with the wording (list reason for objection in comment)	I am okay with these five names and tiers for the context WCAG3 document development. More work is needed IMHO for the tiers associated with conformity assessment or program maturity in general. For that that reason, and to provide the working groups time to practice with tiers, I recommend: ad hoc, planned, resourced, and measured. See: https://www.section508.gov/manage/reporting/guidelines-program-maturity/
Mary Jo Mueller	Agree with the wording	In reading the meeting minutes it seems the use of these terms is just to provide the status of the various outcomes and main sections of info in the WCAG drafts? Will it be used on the other work products? (How-to, Outcomes, methods content as well?) Should there be an "Implemented" to indicate there are sufficient valid implementations, or a "looking for implementations" to seek submissions of valid implementations?
JaEun Jemma Ku	Agree with the wording
Andrew Somers	Agree with the wording

2. Levels assigned to Working Draft

Per our agreed-upon process, Wilco and Michael created a branch that assigns status levels to content in the WCAG 3 working draft. The strategy was to mark content as exploratory unless it was explicitly marked as placeholder content using an editor's note. Placeholder and exploratory content is hidden by default and can be viewed using the button under section 1.2. We have assigned levels at a section level at this time but as content develops, more granular levels will be assigned.

Do you:

Summary

Choice	All responders
Choice	Results
Agree with levels assigned	5
Agree with the levels assigned with some adjustments.	1
Something else	1

(1 response didn't contain an answer to this question)

Details

Responder	Levels assigned to Working Draft	Comments
Rachael Bradley Montgomery	Agree with levels assigned
Laura Carlson
Jennifer Delisi	Agree with the levels assigned with some adjustments.	Editorial comment: in 1.2, just before the toggle, there may be an s missing in "removed from the table of content." Recommendation: Because to some it may not be clear how this works and if it is working (example: their display is set in a way that they cannot experience the toggle change within the same view), recommend adding a graphic demonstrating: sample of content without placeholder and exploratory sections; sample of content with placeholder and exploratory sections revealed.
Wilco Fiers	Agree with levels assigned
Bruce Bailey	Agree with levels assigned
Mary Jo Mueller	Agree with levels assigned	The assignments look good to me. I have a few comments beyond the question asked. 1) Is it intentional that the statement floats over (stays on top of) other content as you scroll through the sub-sections? Initially, it was a little confusing what that meant. 2) Finding the button to show exploratory content was somewhat difficult and the text is so very tiny on that button. 3) This is more of a WCAG 3 structure comment, but the Outcome sections don't really look like headings as they are not numbered (they look like links) so visually it looks a bit odd seeing the status level under each even though it is the right place 4) Nit-picky editorial: Need a space after the link in the notation and the sentence describing it.
JaEun Jemma Ku	Agree with levels assigned
Andrew Somers	Something else	The link directs to an HTML (missing styles) and no indication of any status level assigned ??

More details on responses

Rachael Bradley Montgomery: last responded on 11, February 2022 at 14:21 (UTC)
Laura Carlson: last responded on 11, February 2022 at 14:42 (UTC)
Jennifer Delisi: last responded on 11, February 2022 at 17:10 (UTC)
Wilco Fiers: last responded on 14, February 2022 at 16:41 (UTC)
Bruce Bailey: last responded on 15, February 2022 at 14:32 (UTC)
Mary Jo Mueller: last responded on 15, February 2022 at 15:18 (UTC)
JaEun Jemma Ku: last responded on 15, February 2022 at 15:55 (UTC)
Andrew Somers: last responded on 15, February 2022 at 23:35 (UTC)