Silver Deep Dive

AGWG

1

Approach for Today’s Deep Dive

• Goal: To agree on what will be included in the First Public Working Draft of WCAG 3.0 to encourage public comment and review
• FPWD should represent work of Silver to date, meets the requirements, and inspires feedback
• Nothing we decide is final
• We will include editor’s notes about ongoing work and areas we want feedback on
• Conversation on a topic will continue until it begins to recycle
• Please avoid revisiting issues unless you have additional points or clarifications that have not been voiced
• Please be as concise as possible while still explaining your concerns
• Proposed solutions are always encouraged
• When conversation seems complete, we will straw poll
• Please be polite and respectful

2

Revisit MVP

• MVP Agreement
• Silver Requirements
• Silver Timeline
• August 11th - Silver Deep Dive; Silver Outcomes from sugroups due
• August 14th -Template for for scoring and testing tabs complete
• August 28th - All content work complete, including all tabs on content
• August 31st - Silver FPWD goes to review by Silver Taskforce and AG Working Group
• September 22nd - CFC on Silver FPWD
• October 8th - Publish Silver FPWD
• November 6th - Silver FPWD Public Review Period Ends
• November 10th - Deep Dive on Silver FPWD Issues

3

Scope & Definitions

• View updates page - agreed?
• View+Path vs View only
• Proposed Definitions
• “View”, can be applied to components, templates, design systems, etc.�
• The interface available whilst progressing along the path;

​

• Path
• The steps through an interface needed to accomplish a desired activity.�

We’ll continue to work on these terms.

4

Guideline Scoring Issues

Tests are scored as appropriate (Binary, Percentage, Rubric/Adjectival)

Proposals

• 3 Types of Testing �Run atomic tests on views to get percentage for each guideline. �Test path for failures. Calculate functional outcome scores then a final score.
• Weighted Scoring Proposal �Roll up results from test into guidelines; Score guideline based on # of functional categories impacted; Weight based on predetermined criticality.

​

Weighting the scores, or ensuring each category is included?

5

Scoring method (% / adjectives)

• Percentages
• Adjectival
• Points (Additive)

Additive points vs Normalisation

Adding up points, vs removing points from a total.

Percentage vs Adjectival

• Method level
• Guidelines level
• Category level
• Overall score

​

6

Deprecating Scores

1. Date stamp conformance claims only - Treat score as snapshot (Silver majority supports)�
2. Date stamp the conformance claim and
1. Depreciate the total score over time
2. Mandate an end of life for total score
3. Depreciate the holistic score over time (assumes updates of atomic scores)
4. Mandate an end of life for the holistic score (assumes updates of atomic scores)

What should be the trigger for an update to a conformance score?

​

7

Exceptions and Not Applicable

How to handle when a test/guideline doesn’t apply? Examples

• Captions are provided for all prerecorded audio content in synchronized media, except when the media is a media alternative for text and is clearly labeled as such.
• Web pages do not contain anything that flashes more than three times in any one second period, or the flash is below the general flash and red flash thresholds.
• Users are warned of the duration of any user inactivity that could cause data loss, unless the data is preserved for more than 20 hours when the user does not take any actions.

8

Comparison - Many Errors Off Path

9

% to % using Not Present

% to % using 100%

% to Adjectival using Not Present

% to Adjectival using 100%

Adjectival to Adjectival using 3

3 Page Path

• Less than half of Images have descriptive alt text
• Less than half images have alt text
• Less than half Descriptive images are hidden
• An uncaptioned video
• Several “read more” links
• Less than half of text meets minimum contrast
• Missing HTML title
• Less than half of headings are descriptive
• Some images of text
• Focus is visible less than half of the time

Wrap Up

• How do we Address Intersectional Needs?
• Functional Needs Document
• Consensus on what we put forward in FPWD
• Outstanding work in editor's note
• Links to alternative(s)
• Next Steps

10

Actions from Today

1. Come back to the question of how to include representative sampling in WCAG 3.0. One suggestion was to bring specific wording for an editor’s note back to the group.
2. Set up small group to better define the “view” and “path” concepts and bring the suggested terms and definitions back to a joint AG/Silver meeting within 2 weeks.
3. Need to discuss maintenance model in the future.

11

Additional Information

12

Holistic Testing (AT, User-centered design methods, Usability)

Still to be defined, there are big questions around:

• How variable the testing results could be;
• How people write test-plans appropriately for conformance;
• Whether to include as testing to pass, or ticking that it has been tested and the results have been acted on;

​

​

13

Metrics & Plan for Evaluating Conformance Scoring

Metrics and Plan for Evaluating Conformance Scoring

W3C WAI Research and Development Working Group (RDWG) held an Online symposium on Web Accessibility Metrics in 2011. The Research Report of that symposium provides helpful directions we can use.

• Validity - does scoring actually reflect the score that the digital product should get?
• Reliability - do different testers achieve similar results?
• Sensitivity - does final score capture the impact of the severity of accessibility barriers and are different disabilities treated equally by the proposal?
• Adequacy - do small changes in accessibility have appropriately small scoring changes?
• Complexity - what resources are required to accomplish the conformance testing?

​

14

Sample Tests

Atomic tests

• Heading has non-empty accessible name
• Heading is descriptive
• Headers attribute specified on a cell refers to cells in the same table element
• Content is always presented In a meaningful sequence

Holistic Tests

​

15

Total Scoring

• Silver Requirements - Consider when discussing scoring
• 3.2 Flexible Maintenance and Extensibility - Create a maintenance and extensibility model for guidelines that can better meet the needs of people with disabilities using emerging technologies and interactions. The process of developing the guidance includes experts in the technology.
• 3.6 Regulatory Environment - The Guidelines provide broad support, including
• Structure, methodology, and content that facilitates adoption into law, regulation, or policy, and
• clear intent and transparency as to purpose and goals, to assist when there are questions or controversy.
• 3.7 Motivation - The Guidelines motivate organizations to go beyond minimal accessibility requirements by providing a scoring system that rewards organizations which demonstrate a greater effort to improve accessibility.
• Discussion: How to report final score?
• Single FICO-like score
• A single overarching score and scores reported against Functional Need Categories

​

​

16