This is an archived snapshot of W3C's public bugzilla bug tracker, decommissioned in April 2019. Please see the home page for more details.

Bug 1087 - Address Accessibility in Requirements
Summary: Address Accessibility in Requirements
Alias: None
Product: QA
Classification: Unclassified
Component: QASpec-GL (show other bugs)
Version: LC-2004-11-22
Hardware: All All
: P2 normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Karl Dubost
QA Contact: Karl Dubost
Keywords: LC, SpecGL
Depends on:
Reported: 2005-02-07 15:45 UTC by Karl Dubost
Modified: 2005-04-28 11:53 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:


Description Karl Dubost 2005-02-07 15:45:15 UTC
About: General
SpecGL does not mention the need to consider accessibility while writing
a spec, particularly the need for XML-based vocabularies to conform to 
something like the XML Accessibility Guidelines.
Request: an additional requirement. For example, consider adding a
Requirement to 1.1:
[proposal]Address Accessibility
What does it mean?
Accessibility must be encouraged by the Working Group.  The benefit of
addressing accessibility is the increased likelihood that both user
agents and authoring tools will implement the accessibility features of
the specification from the beginning.  Otherwise, it make take several
revisions before software addresses accessibility features, leaving
people with disabilities behind.  Formalizing the position of the
Working Group by a clear defined section and prose removes ambiguities
for the specification users about the possibility of addressing
accessibility. Refer to the XML Accessibility Guidelines.
Comment 1 Karl Dubost 2005-02-07 15:46:10 UTC
Note: There are issues with this proposal and this is a request to start 
a dialog to help us figure out exactly what should be required.  For 
example, XAG is a good place to begin discussion, but because we are 
unsure of its future we are unsure about recommending its inclusion. We 
also think the issues raised/possible opportunities to address with 
SpecGL might go beyond what is currently in the XAG. Therefore, we (the 
WAI CG or at a minimum the PFWG) request the opportunity to discuss this 
issue with you.
Comment 2 Karl Dubost 2005-03-03 17:41:24 UTC

karl: getting onto bug 1087
... the WAI CG would like us to asks to address accessibility  in specifications
... we already had that comment 2 years ago
... and we said it was out of scope of our document

Mark: as a general rule, I don't  think we address content

Lynne: her argument was that to  write a good spec, you need to address accessibility
... but I agress with Karl that this out of scope

dom: what about putting this in  an informal section?

mark: but then we'll get flamed  for not mentioning this or that

dom: we can always put an  appropriate disclaimer

karl: I wouldn't put it in a GP,  since that would be untestable

lynne: what about putting in the  scope section?

mark: but it's clearly out of  scope

tim: but accessibility is  important to have in mind when designing a spec

karl: but the list can get on for  ever
... it is indeed important to address a wide variety of  topics
... but they're not related to what we try to do in SpecGL

tim: what about putting somewhere  in an informative part?

mark: there are 2 levels to  this
... we don't want to require specs to address security,  accessibility
... although I see no problem in saying that specs should be  accessible

karl: but what the WAI CG asked  was about topics addressed in the spec
... I like Lynne's proposal to put that in the scope  section

dom: I like the idea
... I think we should take the opportunity to say also that  it's a good idea to address topics like 
"accessibility, device  independent, i18n, security", etc

ACTION: Lynne to propose an addition to scope  wrt accessibility, etc being out of scope but worth 
having in mind by 2005-02-16
Comment 3 Karl Dubost 2005-03-03 18:27:27 UTC

       LR has proposed wording for the Scope of QA SpecGL at
       There being no objections, it was adopted without dissention.
       This item is now resolved.
Comment 4 Dominique Hazael-Massieux 2005-04-08 10:03:25 UTC
After further discussion with WAI CG, we decided to integrated more details in
the new "Beyond conformance" section about accessibility, and possibly other
horizontal domains considerations.
Comment 5 Dominique Hazael-Massieux 2005-04-28 11:34:50 UTC
Resolution: The QA Working Group agrees with the request of the WAI CG that
SpecGL should mention the need to consider accessibility while writing a
specification, but disagree with making this a normative requirement in SpecGL,
since its scope in this version of the document is mainly focused on conformance
related items and that QA WG participants don't have enough background and
experience to add further requirements on this topic at this stage of
development. In addition to accessibility, the QA Working Group has decided that
SpecGL should mention the need to additionally consider internationalization and
device independence while writing a specification. Accordingly, a new Section
3.3 (Accessibility, Internationalization, and Device Independence
Considerations) has been created in the revised SpecGL draft. Note that there is
a reference to the XML Accessibility Guidelines within Section 3.3. 
Comment 6 Dominique Hazael-Massieux 2005-04-28 11:53:49 UTC
setting version to LC in case of future use