– DRAFT –
Accessibility Supported Subgroup Meeting - Week 5

Reviewing working doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1XxzwsgWZSDh2EDqTag-nYfrqAT3b6Glpu8DGbVpTd9M/edit

1. Documentation Check-in.

Makoto: review use cases, then pro and con discussion

Use case 2 , 3, 4 well in progress

Bruce: Finished 508 using heading from Makoto use case
… track changes is new stuff

One highlight: testing with AT not popular
… instead Trusted Tester, ICT Baseline is newer
… some links
… reasons not to test with AT is that experienced developers rare
… testing with AT does happen if agency knows the configuration and the employees
… also testing with AT if process driven testing leaves gaps

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1XxzwsgWZSDh2EDqTag-nYfrqAT3b6Glpu8DGbVpTd9M/edit#heading=h.rlwaf99rco0d

Bruce gives some background on DHS

Bill Peterson, DHS (formally ED0

Allen Hoffman, IRS

Robert Baker, SSA

Kathy Eng, formally DOJ, elevated Trusted Tester to curriculm

Goal is to turn entry level IT specialist into accessibility testers

Makoto: If I was looking for accredidation, is TT route

Bruce: Feds hiring probably ask.
… Microsoft has incorporated into their on-boarding

Bruce: 508 is from Rehabilation Act

Things were going strong in 2000, with publication of 508 Standards

508 took back seat to security after 9-11, but that was enough for initial traction

Bruce: couple of my own suggestions at end

Laura Miller: There are solutions for testing such as inspect tool, aids for people who are not experience at users
… JAWS inspect has an option for review website
… there are other 3rd party tools geared for testing , not just scanning

Bruce: I forgot to mention ANDI -- which was huge

Bruce: SSA had developers, and was able to develop this open source tool which they needed to move away from AT-oriented testing
… nowadays Trusted Tester (and Baseline) methodology heavily based on ANDI features and use

<Makoto> Accessibility Support Database by W3C https://www.w3.org/WAI/accessibility-support/

Bruce: ANDI open source, from SSA.gov/accessibility/andi

Makoto: Another driver in Japan is that fewer and fewer developers conversant with HTML....
… one W3C WAI's project lead by Shadi was WAI accessibility support database...

https://www.w3.org/WAI/accessibility-support/
… this was one of the projects Shadi was working on before leaving W3C, large database but not complete
… not fully endorsed by AGWG but it is a pretty good proof of concept and has many ARIA techniques in it for example...
… database includes screen reader compatibility results as well
… database can be multilingual as well , so will work for Japanese screen readers for example
… we don't have to compile test procedures and expected results ourself
… please take a look if you have not used before
… we might want to recommend additional funding
… question for bruce if u.s. feds interested in this kind of work

Bruce: Yes! That database and their are other initiative collecting shared testing, namely ACT which Wilco Fiers and Kathy Eng co-chair

Makoto: login should only be needed for adding test cases, but much is public facing, other portions should work with W3C log in

Makoto, moving on use case 3 and 4

Rachael: see link in use case 3 for what AT supports ARIA aspects

Laura: Use case 4 Accessibility OVerlays

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1XxzwsgWZSDh2EDqTag-nYfrqAT3b6Glpu8DGbVpTd9M/edit#heading=h.pfjwt2cbuk2n
… addressing overlays head-on is that one point of tension is that overlays tend to interfere with default behavior of screen reading software
… example include code snip hiding button
… question "is it conformant" when functionality is removed -- so only seems accessible, problems are masked rather than fixed

Rachael: Concern is that "meets WCAG 2" then conformant -- passes a test -- but functionality removed.
… That is a challenging question for WCAG3 to address.

Laura: Analog is removing all images -- so not alt failures !

Makoto: Is Overlay characterized as Assistive Technology?

Rachael: It is a mix, so that is the challenge. Some add features (like speech) while other overlay strip out any code which is non-conforming -- but that removes features...
… then there is other risk of overlays conflict with end-user AT

Makoto: We just came up with a question on testing, to audit with Overlay enabled or not. Should we test the website with each function on?
… Do we need to care about a web page turning overlay functions on?

Rachael: Our organization is taking the position site must work without overlay.

Bruce: In federal space, there are example with overlays and widgets that are good models, DOI, SSA home page, Whitehouse.gov...

Kick off "Pros and Cons discussion"

Bruce: but generally overlays are problematic, and point of accessible design is compatibility with AT so overlays are counterproductive.

Makoto: Moving to pro/con topic...
… have a document to share, please list pros and cons of keeping "accessibility supported" concept in WCAG3
… for now, please fill out individually and future meeting we can start to consolidate as brain storming exercise...
… continue discussion next week.
… this sort of exercise is not that familiar to me, so I welcome suggestions
… please start to fill out by next week.

Makoto: so quick thought in all four quadrants please, keep / not keep , pros / cons

Makoto: Hope to hear from AWK and Pournima next week as well.
… pro/cons keep/not keep in same document at end

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1XxzwsgWZSDh2EDqTag-nYfrqAT3b6Glpu8DGbVpTd9M/edit#heading=h.heym9casb735

rssagent, make minutes