Silver Requirements: 1.2. Broader Scope

[spanchang]

Reference: Requirements for Silver Nov 18, 2020 Draft, item 1.2. Silver Scope - broader scope:
Please can the requirements doc include rationale for covering more than just content (i.e. websites, software / applications and such)? The scope extends to:

• authoring tools, such as content management systems
• user agents, such as browsers and media players
• assistive technologies, such as screen readers, screen magnifiers, and assistants for memory, organization, or simplification
• operating systems and other platforms who may want advice for features to better support people with disabilities

So long as it is limited to the accessibility of the UIs of authoring tool / browser / OS, it is fine.
But attempting to cover what features an authoring tool / browser /OS should offer to facilitate / enhance accessibility as part of a guideline that covers content will make the guideline very very vast and increase complexity for comprehension and navigation.
The ATAG, UAG have been separate guidelines for valid reasons all these years, so what has changed now?
Content designers and developers who account for 99+ percent of users who will use these guidelines are completely dependent on what features platforms / user agents / OS / platforms offer and author content accordingly.
Guidance on how OS / platforms / authoring tools and user agents should be built to aid accessibility is a completely different cup of tea and is the domain of a very small set of IT folk engaged in that specialized field. It is irrelevant for designers and developers of content.
The statement at the end of the doc, "Our intent is to provide guidance for a diverse group of stakeholders including content creators, browsers, authoring tools, assistive technologies, and more" is quite scant as a justification for this major shift.
The Requirements doc should address this "broader scope" explicitly with detailed justification if Silver has to continue down this path.
Thanks,
Sailesh

[alastc]

Proposed response:

---

What the AGWG can cover is defined by the charter, which is careful negotiated between the Chairs, W3C staff, and member organizations.

A key part of the charter is:

"The Accessibility Guidelines Working Group describes the characteristics of accessible web content, in the form of guidance to content developers. It also describes support from other components needed for its advice to work, such as technologies, user agents, and authoring tools."

I.e. AG can produce normative guidance for authors, but not user-agents or authoring tools. However, where there is overlap, they can be referred to.

The WCAG 3 requirements say that

Advice for all levels of the accessibility technology stack who wish to support the WCAG 3.0 core Guidelines including... digital content ... authoring tools ... user agents ...
The current project design does not intend to write separate specifications or normative requirements for the technology stack beyond digital content.

This confirms the scope from the charter.

With that context, WCAG 3 is not intended to normatively cover "features an authoring tool / browser /OS should offer to facilitate / enhance accessibility", and that is covered in the requirements document.

Where the scope requirement currently says:

The guidelines provide guidance for people and organizations that produce digital assets and technology of varying size and complexity. This includes large, dynamic, and complex websites. Our intent is to provide guidance for a diverse group of stakeholders including content creators, browsers, authoring tools, assistive technologies, and more.

I'm proposing an update to that section:

The guidelines provide guidance and a conformance model for people and organizations that produce digital assets and technology of varying size and complexity. This includes large, dynamic, and complex websites. The associated informative materials will include guidance for a diverse group of stakeholders including content creators, browsers, authoring tools, assistive technologies, and more.

[alastc]

PR created, needs approving.

[alastc]

Approved from meeting and 5 day window.