Scoping conformance

Problem statement

• In WCAG 2.x we used ‘page’ to determine conformance.
• With changes in technology as well as a pivot to a more user centered approach, do we need to rethink the scope of conformance?

​

Conformance requirements

In order for technology to conform to WCAG 3.0, the following conformance requirements apply:

1. Conformance level - Content MUST meet the requirements of the selected conformance level.
2. Processes and views - Conformance (and conformance level) MUST apply to complete processes and views, and MUST NOT exclude any part of a process or view.

​

Process definition (3 FPWD and 2.x)

A sequence of steps that need to be completed in order to accomplish an activity / task from end-to-end.

• series of user actions where each action is required in order to complete an activity
• Successful use of a series of Web pages on a shopping site requires users to view alternative products, prices and offers, select products, submit an order, provide shipping information and provide payment information.
• An account registration page requires successful completion of a Turing test before the registration form can be accessed.

​

View definition

• All content visually and programmatically available without a substantive change.
• Views vary based on the technology being tested. While these guidelines provide guidance on scoping a view, the tester will determine what constitutes a view, and describe it. Views will often vary by technology. Views typically include state permutations that are based on that view such as dialogs and alerts, but some states may deserve to be treated as separate views.

​

Blog question

• “ Is this approach of using complete processes as the smallest unit of conformance workable for different types of organizations?
• “These include organizations with very large, dynamic, or complex content, medium-sized organizations relying on external accessibility resources, and very small organizations with limited resources?”

Positive responses

• “allow for bugs, provided their impact on users with disabilities is limited”
• Process “more closely aligned with our own test procedures and with the way users interact with content.”
• “allows them to focus on making core tasks accessible”

Is a process a smaller unit than a view/page?

• Sometimes they’re the same (e.g., 1-page survey)
• Often a simple process stretches across multiple views or pages (multi-page survey)
• Complex processes inevitably span multiple views (flight)
• Sometimes it’s debatable (is a login a separate page or view?)

​

• Depends to a great degree on the granularity of a process (Turing vs purchase)

​

Responses (in issues)

• What constitutes a process?
• Is there a way of assessing based on views used most often?
• What if you are workflow dependent?
• Can measure object level but
• Workflow issues not captured
• Is it “user process”?

Can they be viewed as complementary?

• vertical assessments by page
• Horizontal assessments by process
• Page tends to be easier to test by machine
• Process tends to be more valid for user success

​

What is a user process?

• Distinguish between development process and user process
• How do we ensure authors compare similar things?
• What if we create a taxonomy of common user processes?
• Can we ‘stack’ smaller process units together to create some “end to end” processes?

​

Some sample processes

• Feedback
• Contact
• Purchase
• Add to cart
• Checkout
• Choose item, Provide user information, Confirm details
• Pay
• Sign In
• Register
• Search
• View Search Results

Reporting-specific responses

• how will this work when reporting conformance of a product in a procurement or bid situation
• How would these tested processes map into the documentation of product accessibility in an Accessibility Conformance Report?
• Would a product need to document which processes were tested to give an accurate representation of conformance?
• How does user role affect user process considerations (admin, employee, visitor)

What if in order to meet certain guidelines, a conformance statement is required?

• includes statements of scope? self-report which user processes are tested?
• Consider and discuss this suggested approach:
• Test against page, equivalent to 2.x
• Must test
• Whether it must pass, is a separate conversation*
• Test successful completion of process
• Report against scope tested
• Use same mechanical and manual tests plus some additional 
• User acceptance testing and protocols
• Report against scope tested, how it was tested, and results

Stacking test methods