This Wiki page is edited by participants of the Cognitive and Learning Disabilities Accessibility Task Force. It does not necessarily represent consensus and it may have incorrect information or information that is not supported by other Task Force participants, WAI, or W3C. It may also have some very useful information.

Methodology for gap analysis

From Cognitive Accessibility Task Force
Jump to: navigation, search

methodology for gap analysis

The current proposal to Look at the techniques, accommodations and issues and plot them against the following: definition of a gap: gap for accessibility is when people can theoretically do something but can not with the current design, content or implementation.

  1. Do we currently have a solution ( full, most, some, no)
  2. Confidence - Backed up by research
  3. Support in W3C standards (1,2,3,4 and RN if requirements are needed - see key bellow)
  4. Other support needed (provide summary or reference to discussion)

Key for WCAG

1. Currently adequately included in WCAG

2. It goes in under a success criteria (SC) at an appropriate level as a technique

3. A success criteria (SC) needs to be upgraded

4. A new success criteria (SC) is needed - Add a reference to a draft SC

RN. (Requirement Needed) Needs a requirements are needed or document for additional semantics, metadata, user agents and or infrastructure

ID (Idea Development) the idea needs more development

How to format the gap analysis

we could either

  1. Plot it as a matrix/table or
  2. Headers by recommendation categories. For example all items were we recommend new techniques would be together, likewise all items that require a new success criteria would be together under a heading.

We can also have the gap analysis done we talk first about the commonalities of all cognitive disabilities and afterwards unique disabilities

Example 1. Table format

Technique: Enough Time This is covered in part by and 2.2.1 and fully by 2.2.3 No Timing: Timing is not an essential part of the event or activity presented by the content, except for non-interactive synchronized media and real-time events. (Level AAA)


criteria score comment
Do we currently have a solution? full
Credibility high
WCAG 3 This is covered by 2.2.3 No Timing: Timing is not an essential part of the event or activity presented by the content, except for non-interactive synchronized media and real-time events. Level AAA - Needs to be AA

Or 2.2.1 (level A) Extend: The user is warned before time expires and given at least 20 seconds - this needs to be set at 6 hours not 10 seconds, so that the user can have a break and Data must not be lost if sessions times out.

References

Example 2. Category format

Items where we recommend that a WCAG success criteria SC need to be upgraded

  1. No timing or no loss of data - This is covered by 2.2.3 No Timing: Timing is not an essential part of the event or activity presented by the content, except for non-interactive synchronized media and real-time events. Level AAA - Needs to be AA

Or 2.2.1 (level A) Extend: The user is warned before time expires and given at least 20 seconds - this needs to be set at 6 hours not 10 seconds, so that the user can have a break and Data must not be lost if sessions times out.

Note this can be a table as well such as:

Table of Success criteria (SC) to upgrade

suggestion Reason Confidence level Who it helps Comments and see also
2.2.3 No Timing and loss of data should be upgraded to A 2.2.1 (level A) Extend: The user is warned before time expires and given at least 20 seconds - this needs to be set at 6 hours not 10 seconds, so that the user can have a break and Data must not be lost if sessions times out. high This is very important for almost all our users. If you are finding a page difficult or need extra time and the session times out you give up task. If you can not do it within the time requirement it is completely unusable.
Example Example Example Example
Example Example Example Example