w3c/wbs-design or
by mail to sysreq.
W3C
Site Navigation
Nearby
Results of Questionnaire Followup AUWG survey on Rephrasing SC to positive IF clauses - 17 June
The results of this questionnaire are available to anybody. In addition, answers are sent to the following email address: jeanne@w3.org
This questionnaire was open from 2013-06-11 to 2013-06-21.
7 answers have been received.
Jump to results for question:
1. B.4.1.2
Current
B.4.1.2 Option to Reactivate Features: If authors can turn off an accessible content support feature, then they can turn the feature back on. (Level A)
Jan's original proposal (from previous survey)
B.4.1.2 Option to Reactivate Features: The authoring tool does not include the option to turn off its accessible content support features or the features can be turned back on. (Level A)
Greg's proposal
B.4.1.3 Feature Deactivation Warning: The authoring tool does not include the option to turn off its accessible content support features or, if these features can be disabled, authors are informed that this may increase the risk of content accessibility problems (WCAG). (Level AA)
Jan's proposal from email of 13 June
B.4.1.2 Option to Reactivate Features: The authoring tool does not include the option to turn off its accessible content support features or those features can be turned back on. (Level A)
Summary
| Choice | All responders |
|---|---|
| Results | |
| Keep the Current Wording | |
| Prefer Jan's original proposal from survey | 1 |
| Prefer Greg's proposal | 1 |
| Prefer Jan's proposal from 13 June | 3 |
| Neutral, will accept group consensus | 2 |
| Propose further changes, see comments |
Details
| Responder | B.4.1.2 | B.4.1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| Jan Richards | Prefer Jan's proposal from 13 June | |
| Greg Pisocky | Prefer Greg's proposal | |
| Frederick Boland | Neutral, will accept group consensus | |
| Alessandro Miele | Prefer Jan's proposal from 13 June | |
| Alastair Campbell | Prefer Jan's proposal from 13 June | A little confused as Greg's proposal is for a 4.1.2, and Jan's is for 4.1.3? Greg's wording does seem simpler than the current draft, so that's good to. |
| Tom Babinszki | Neutral, will accept group consensus | |
| Alex Li | Prefer Jan's original proposal from survey |
2. B.2.4.4 Proposal
This SC is at risk because the likelihood of finding implementations is slim to none. The original intent of this SC is to have all templates be accessible. This proposal is my attempt to find a testable, implementable wording of that original intent.
Current
B.2.4.4 Identify Template Accessibility (Enhanced): If the authoring tool provides any non-accessible templates (WCAG) options and does not include a template selection mechanism, then the non-accessible templates include accessibility warnings within the templates. (Level AAA)
Proposed
B.2.4.4 Identify Template Accessibility (Enhanced): All templates meet the WCAG 2.0 success criteria at A and AA that can be applied to each template before the template receives authored content. (Level AAA)
Summary
| Choice | All responders |
|---|---|
| Results | |
| Agree with the proposal | 4 |
| Disagree with the proposal | 1 |
| Neutral, will accept consensus of the group | 1 |
| Suggest the following changes to the proposal (use the comment field) | 1 |
Details
| Responder | B.2.4.4 Proposal | B.2.4.4 |
|---|---|---|
| Jan Richards | Disagree with the proposal | I just don't think we will find implementations if the requirement is All. BTW: What Level of WCAG are you asking for? |
| Greg Pisocky | Agree with the proposal | |
| Frederick Boland | Neutral, will accept consensus of the group | |
| Alessandro Miele | Agree with the proposal | |
| Alastair Campbell | Agree with the proposal | It is possible we could add a clause for the case where templates are not accessible (i.e. adding warnings), but given that this is a AAA criteria just having accessible templates is more straightforward. NB: If we did want the clause for non-accessible templates, I would replace "warnings within the templates" with something like: "All templates meet the WCAG 2.0 success criteria at A and AA that can be applied to each template before the template receives authored content, or the author is warned of the accessibility issues." (I.e. I don't think warning *in* the templates is necessary, it may be better done elsewhere in the interface.) |
| Tom Babinszki | Agree with the proposal | |
| Alex Li | Suggest the following changes to the proposal (use the comment field) | The proposed language is awkward and confusing to me. What does "All templates meet the WCAG 2.0 SC at A and AA that can be applied to each template..." mean? |
More details on responses
- Jan Richards: last responded on 14, June 2013 at 19:27 (UTC)
- Greg Pisocky: last responded on 14, June 2013 at 20:34 (UTC)
- Frederick Boland: last responded on 15, June 2013 at 11:33 (UTC)
- Alessandro Miele: last responded on 16, June 2013 at 10:48 (UTC)
- Alastair Campbell: last responded on 17, June 2013 at 10:05 (UTC)
- Tom Babinszki: last responded on 17, June 2013 at 12:51 (UTC)
- Alex Li: last responded on 17, June 2013 at 16:55 (UTC)
Everybody has responded to this questionnaire.
Compact view of the results / list of email addresses of the responders
WBS home / Questionnaires / WG questionnaires / Answer this questionnaire
Report issues
on GitHub project