Edit comment LC-470 for Accessibility Guidelines Working Group

Quick access to

Previous: LC-622 Next: LC-623

Comment LC-470: Comment Shortname:; Commenter: Roger Hudson <rhudson@usability.com.au>; 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:
Item Number: Make text content readable and understandable.
Part of Item:
Comment Type: TE
Comment (Including rationale for any proposed change):

Guideline 3.1 is concerned with the need to make text readable and understandable. In general WCAG 2.0 contains very few provisions for improving the accessibility of web content for people with cognitive disabilities or learning difficulties. There is the level 3 SC 3.1.5, which is concerned with the reading level of text, however it is a fallacy to assume all cognitive disabilities somehow relate to a persons ability to read.

WCAG 1.0 contained the Priority 1 Checkpoint 14.1 (Use the Clearest and simplest language appropriate for a site's content). It also contained the Priority 2 Checkpoint 12.3 (Divide large blocks of information into more manageable groups where natural and appropriate). Combined these two checkpoints communicated the desirability of preparing content that could be accessed by people with a range of cognitive and intellectual abilities and suggestions for how this could be achieved. Unfortunately, WCAG 2.0 does not appear to contain a similar commitment or guidance to these issues.

Proposed Change:
Guideline 3.1 should contain two new Level 2 success criteria, which read:

1. "When web units contain text, the clearest and simplest language appropriate for the users of the content is used and large blocks of information are presented using appropriate headings and subheading."

2. "When forms are presented, the controls in similar areas of a form should be grouped together and appropriately identified."; Related issues: (space separated ids); WG Notes: [TEAMB] [cog-proposed] Team B, 2/20/07: Proposed SC are not testable. Can we characterize grouping in a way that is testable? Discussed in the 08 March 2007 telecon: resolution: accept lc 470 as amended http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2007/03/08-wai-wcag-minutes.html {partial accept} SEE ACTIONS FOR LC-1255, LC-627 (still pending) @@Response to commenter (taken partially from LC-1255):; Resolution: The working group was unable to come up with a testable equivalent of WCAG1 14.1. However, we have added an advisory technique to guideline 3.1 and SC 3.1.5 that reads, "Using the clearest and simplest language appropriate for the content." We have also added a new Success Criterion to GL 3.1, "Pages are organized into sub-sections with titles", to address some of the properties covered by Checkpoint 12.3. We have added language to the Introduction to highlight the fact that WCAG 2 only addresses some of the needs of people with cognitive, learning, and language disabilities, and calls out the need for more research in this area. WAI is exploring ways in which to support and encourage work in this important area. We have added some best practices for cognitive, learning, and language disabilities as advisory techniques. We have not been able to propose many additional success criteria that meet WCAG's testability requirements.; (Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)