WCAG3 Equity Subgroup

08 August 2022


janina, jeanne, Jen_, Laura_Carlson
Janina, jeanne
jeanne, Jen_

Meeting minutes

review homework


Draft Equity Framework

Laura added links to definitions

Jeanne added summary paragraph

Janina drafted a new definition

Janina's Equity Definition proposal

JSa: How your needs are defined in a spec is an important consideration

JSt: Use the Equity examples from broader disability community

Janina's proposal

MC: We need Equity as a process not as an Outcome

Jennifer: It's an outcome we are aiming for, but not possible with changes in technology

<Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to say aim for outcome and to ask how we would measure outcome and to say we need the emphasis on the challenge we´re addressing, which is individual difference

<laura> Consider equity not so much as an outcome but as a process that we consistently engage in to ensure that people with marginalized disabilities are not left out.

<Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to say goal vs achievement and to say perfect enemy of good and to say equity vs accessibility support and to discuss unmet needs vs oppression

MC: Oppression is a complex topic
… it can be much broader than accessibility

Jennifer: Technical is sociological and Aaron would agree
… Web speed is a sociological issue

<Cyborg__> I am in finally!

Jennifer: it is hard for people with disabilities to be included sociological

<Cyborg__> +1 to everything Jennifer is saying

Janina: We are addressing the sociological issues in APA and will be having a session at TPAC to which everyone is invited

<Cyborg__> one of the things I said - don't know if it made it into the notes so far, was the need for process-based measurements

<Cyborg__> could be aligned with maturity models

Janina: the lack of access of broadband is important, but cannot be addressed in a guideline

<Cyborg__> +1 to lens and filter of equity from Jennifer, +1 to addressing oppression, +1 to addressing intersectionality

Jennifer: They should use progressive enhancement

<Cyborg__> +1 to Michael Cooper's process-based approach

Equity is the goal as the W3C evaluates documented guidelines. This requires evaluating through a variety of lens from disability through socio-economic characteristics. Equity is the "perfect" and we are unlikely to fully attain it, though that should not stop our efforts to deliver equitable outcomes.

<MichaelC> https://raw.githack.com/w3c/silver/evaluating-procedures-proposal/guidelines/index.html#outcome-implementation-procedures

<Cyborg__> connecting equity to outcome implementation procedures

MC: The proposal under consideration by the group is a proposal for evaluating process

<Cyborg__> as a process based measurement for equity

<MichaelC> https://w3c.github.io/maturity-model/

MC: Maturity Model is a separate spec moving forward. Getting credit for gradual improvement


Equity Framework document

Cybele: I actually think those 3 concepts are related,

if equity is a process then the more mature an organization's approach to accessibility the more they strive toward equity and to strive towards equity that is aligned with engaging in meaningful involvement.

So there's multiple things going on here one is as Michael put it things that ought to be in a way part of accessibility, because they are, you know, failure of new technology to get us towards equity.

So that is, that is, say, one level. One level is as Michael referred to or is W. Threec.

Engaging in equity in the way we are addressing accessibility that's level 2.

But there is actually a third as a sort of layer of this, which is, what is that process of striving for equity?

And what does that look like? And if one looks at principles of things like design justice?


There's sort of 10 principles of design justice, which is might be an interesting document to refer to, and and that aligns a lot with the oppression type of conversation.

That kind of approach, and that kind of lens and filter and understanding what that lens and filter looks like, I, I would suggest, are connected to the maturity, model, and meaningful involvement, and those are all process base measurements

<janina> https://www.w3.org/TR/reporting/


So I would say the second. So it would be implementers process but the one that we could provide right as a framework that is measurable; that, for example, if it were to let's just say in the scenario where this goes

to court, or such that it is a process based measurement that a court could also evaluate them against.

So did you do x y and z processes to to move towards equity. Did you do X processes to move towards maturity? Did you do x processes to work towards meaningful involvement, that those X processes could themselves become measurable as part of a conformance?

Janina: Model. No, they are what is comprehended in the maturity model, and that's what it's intent is to capture that kind of data. I also put in a pointer. to the reporting api that Apa has become very interested in it's some mainstream development. because it turns out you don't need a disability to care about load times there's just general interest in the industry, and knowing about load times as being a factor of whether I think published [CUT]

And what Apa is thinking is that we can really leverage this first. Some of these use cases that we've been talking about

<Cyborg__> copying from transcript is good

<Cyborg__> +1 to what Jennifer is saying about equity and intersectional UX

<Cyborg__> this is about task-based measurements?

<Cyborg__> also: what is inequity?

<Zakim> MichaelC, you wanted to ask how much we ¨build in¨ equity vs how much we ¨call out¨ equity and to mention scope, web foundation

WCAG: Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2 defines how to make Web content more accessible to people with disabilities. Accessibility involves a wide range of disabilities, including visual, auditory, physical, speech, cognitive, language, learning, and neurological disabilities. Although these guidelines cover a wide range of issues, they are not able to address the needs of people with all types, degrees, and combinations of disabil[CUT]

MC: How much is our goal to build equity into the spec so we don't need to directly address it

[continued] also make Web content more usable by older individuals with changing abilities due to aging and often improve usability for users in general.

Dust cloud. I keep copying things from transcript and pasting them in, because I can't follow the conversation. 08:54:39 But the thing I was in Q* say is that I have always approached accessibility as providing equitable access, not just for people with disabilities, but for all, because at the end of the day the the barriers to the 08:55:08 digital Service technology. boil down to the same thing if you have a veteran in a remote place on tribal[CUT]

And they can't access the web but say it's a not a disabled, but they just can't access it because it's slow a disabled veteran with certain conditions.

Might have a worse time. particularly if they needed their screen.

So, for example, we provide alt texts, but does that alt text actually provide those who can't see the image the full context of that image in order to provide an equitable outcome of experience. 08:56:54 No. but can we measure that e alt text objectively?

Probably not at this time. We hope that someday we will have the ability to, by some magic evaluate all text to make sure that it auto automatically and objectively to make sure that it's providing with equitable experience but right now we 08:57:23 don't that I think that all types of could potentially be a good, for example, I don't know, anyway, over what I was hearing in in part we do have to be conscious of our scope the world

Michael: wide web. consortium is a technology consortium, and the accessible guidelines group is scoped to working on accessibility. 08:57:50 We definitely recognize that there's a lot more to accessibility than then accessibility.

But we might not be able to address all of it within our scope. 08:58:01 Some of that scope is addressed by other horizontals in W. 08:58:03 Threec. such as internationalization and security, even the Tag ethical principles.

But some of it is outside of W threec scope. 08:58:15 There's a sister organization called the Web Foundation that has a mission on focusing on other aspects of accessibility and equity. 08:58:22 So I'm saying that just to kind of frame what I think we can do. 08:58:27 We can certainly explore it, but we have to understand what our scope is. 08:58:30 I also want to ask the question. I from the conversation i'm, wondering how much is our goal to [CUT]

his back 08:58:41 So that it's just naturally equitable and then you don't actually need the word equity in it is just there versus how much are we looking to call out equity in certain contexts?

And say, Please pay extra attention to equity. In this context I think that could greatly impact kind of how we frame things with the guidelines done

Jeanne: I don't think that what people are saying seems mutually exclusionary or something.

Cybele: So I just wanna reference potential places of inter intersection that over Earth places have overlap 08:59:34 Because I keep thinking about. How does this apply to conformance? 08:59:37 And how could this be used in a measurable way?

I heard in some of jennifer's words and and I wrote it entire c intersectional user experience or intersectional ux I don't have any direct references to like I 08:59:57 haven't done the homework since is about trying to identify like what are the intersectional ux parameters that currently exist? 09:00:05 In the ways that are that are disability. centric.

But certainly we could look at and that could be written into at least the definition questions around. 09:00:17 You know how might our understanding of equity be informed by intersectional ux that's one? 09:00:29 Secondly, I heard in some of what Ge sorry some of what Jennifer was saying. 09:00:37 Reference to what I think was discussed among task based measurements.

And so I just wanted to, especially around the old text example. 09:00:49 The third thing that I heard in what Jennifer was saying, that might tie back into the current conversation around scope or fit within scope, is trying to understand what is inequity which we know that the aaa

riple. A example is an example of inequity. 09:01:06 But certainly there are other examples of inequity, and, some of the use case based ones that Jennifer mentioned around bedrooms and indigenous folks with disabilities. 09:01:19 Would fit within forms of inequity. and one of the things that I reference to Jean after our conversation ended last time, when I was still trying to get my bearings was, and how might we capture what those stories? 09[CUT]

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by scribe.perl version 192 (Tue Jun 28 16:55:30 2022 UTC).


No scribenick or scribe found. Guessed: jeanne

Maybe present: Cybele, Jennifer, JSa, JSt, MC, Michael, WCAG