Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Issue severity subgroup pre-TPAC content #656

Merged
merged 5 commits into from Nov 10, 2022
Merged

Issue severity subgroup pre-TPAC content #656

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
c476658
Initial commit of issue severity subgroup update
fstrr Sep 2, 2022
f96a941
Add critical failures to two outcomes
fstrr Sep 2, 2022
c0be88c
Added critical issue to expected results for all procedures
gradualclearing Sep 5, 2022
eaaffb4
Added one more critical issue, changed "a" to "the"
gradualclearing Sep 5, 2022
c8931f6
Combined context/process questions; other minor edits
gradualclearing Sep 5, 2022
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Diff view
Diff view
25 changes: 20 additions & 5 deletions methods/functional-images/tests.html
View file
Open in desktop
Expand Up @@ -37,7 +37,11 @@ <h4>Procedure for HTML</h4>
</section>
<section>
<h4>Expected Results</h4>
<p>Check #2 and #3 are true.</p>
<ul>
<li>Check #2 and #3 are true.</li>
<li>Critical issue if #2 is false and the functional image is needed to complete a task.</li>
</ul>

</section>
<section>
<h4>Procedure for Technology Agnostic</h4>
Expand All @@ -51,7 +55,11 @@ <h4>Procedure for Technology Agnostic</h4>
</section>
<section>
<h4>Expected Results</h4>
<p>Checks #2 and #3, or #2 and #4, or #2 and #5 are true.</p>
<ul>
<li>Checks #2 and #3, or #2 and #4, or #2 and #5 are true.</li>
<li>Critical issue if #2, #3, or #5 is false and the functional image is needed to complete a task.</li>
</ul>
<p></p>
</section>
</section>
<section>
Expand All @@ -77,7 +85,11 @@ <h4>Procedure [for HTML]</h4>
</section>
<section>
<h4>Expected Results</h4>
<p>Checks #1 and #2 are true</p>
<ul>
<li>Checks #1 and #2 are true</li>
<li>Critical issue if #2, #3, or #5 is false and the functional image is needed to complete a task.</li>
</ul>

<ul>
<li>If a functional image is not purely decorative and CSS is used instead of an img or input (type=”image”) element, that does not pass.</li>
<li>If a functional image is not purely decorative and the img or input (type=”image”) element doesn’t have an alt attribute, that does not pass. </li>
Expand All @@ -97,7 +109,10 @@ <h4>Procedure [Technology Agnostic]</h4>
</section>
<section>
<h4>Expected Results</h4>
<p>Checks #2 and #3, or #2 and #4, or #2 and #5 are true.</p>
<ul>
<li>Checks #2 and #3, or #2 and #4, or #2 and #5 are true.</li>
<li>Critical issue if #2, #3, or #5 is false and the functional image is needed to complete a task.</li>
</ul>
</section>
</section>
</section>
Expand All @@ -109,4 +124,4 @@ <h2>Holistic Tests</h2>
</section>
</main>
</body>
</html>
</html>
13 changes: 6 additions & 7 deletions methods/text-equiv/tests.html
View file
Open in desktop
Expand Up @@ -23,19 +23,18 @@ <h2>Atomic Tests</h2>
<li>Check that the captions can be turned on and off
<ul><li>Closed captions can be turned on and off</li>
<li>Open captions cannot be turned off</li>
</ul></li>
</ul>
</li>
</ol>

<p><strong>Rating:</strong></p>
<ul>
<li>Each video with no captions is rated a 0
</li>
<li> Each video with open captions is rated a 1
</li>
<li> Each video with closed captions is rated a 2</li>
<li>Each video with no captions is rated a 0</li>
<li>Each video with open captions is rated a 1</li>
<li>Each video with closed captions is rated a 2</li>
<li>Critical issue if a video with no captions is needed to complete a task</li>
</ul>


<p class="ednote">We want public feedback about whether Open Captions (burned in captions) pass for Bronze level. Open captions are not text and cannot be customized for people with low vision or routed to a braille display for people who are blind-deaf. </p>
</section>
</section>
Expand Down
45 changes: 43 additions & 2 deletions requirements/index.html
View file
Open in desktop
Expand Up @@ -109,7 +109,7 @@ <h4>Usability</h4>
<li><strong>Advocacy Tool</strong>: Usability oriented toward a broad audience for WCAG 3.0 can help improve the general advocacy of digital accessibility. Improving the reach of WCAG 3.0 can help improve the awareness of accessibility considerations. Compelling information that is contextually relevant to the standards may also aid in convincing audiences of any type. </li>
</ul>
</section>
<section id="oppotunities_conformance">
<section id="opportunities_conformance">
<h4>Conformance Model</h4>
<p>There are several areas for exploration in how conformance can work. These opportunities may or may not be incorporated. Then need to work together, and that interplay will be governed by the design principles</p>
<ul>
Expand All @@ -118,7 +118,7 @@ <h4>Conformance Model</h4>
<li><strong>Accessibility Supported</strong>: As the technologies evolve, the interoperability of content, user agents, and assistive technology will continue to blur. Interoperability may be affected by any number of factors outside of the control of the author and publisher of digital content. WCAG 3.0 can include advice to user agents and assistive technology developers. Authors are not responsible for interoperability problems beyond a reasonable effort.</li>
</ul>
</section>
<section id="oppotunities_maintenance">
<section id="opportunities_maintenance">
<h4>Maintenance</h4>
<ul>
<li>
Expand All @@ -130,6 +130,47 @@ <h4>Maintenance</h4>
<strong>Governance</strong>: Utilize tools that allow interested parties to predict when issues important to them are being discussed. Maintain a backlog that reflects issues along with their status. </li>
</ul>
</section>
<section id="opportunities_issue-severity">
<h4>Issue Severity</h4>

<div class="ednote">
<p>This section is exploratory. Outstanding questions that need to be addressed include:</p>
<ol>
<li>What to do with non-critical issues?</li>
<li>How to deal with people having have different ideas on what is critical?</li>
<li>How do we incorporate context/process/task? Is that part of scoping, or issue severity? Both are important to the end result.</li>
<li>Can the matrix inform designation of functional categories? For example, the <a href="https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG3/2021/outcomes/text-alternative-available">Text Alternative Available outcome</a>.</li>
</ol>
</div>

<p>The Issue Severity Subgroup:</p>

<ol>
<li>Demonstrated that it is possible to categorize tests by severity. See the <a href="https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1MEdnI4CvrTlq1843MZfWLaIBGmoGXXQPpUOhEY1NgV4/edit#gid=412502721">critical severity worksheet</a> for this information.</li>
<li>Added examples of critical failures to the tests for <a href="https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG3/2022/methods/functional-images/#tests-button">Text Alternative Available</a> and <a href="https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG3/2022/methods/text-equiv/#tests-button">Translates Speech And Non-Speech Audio</a>.</li>
<li>Severity rating is best done at the test level. The higher the level the impact is assessed at, the less it aligns with the experience.</li>
<li>It would be best to incorporate task/context for the best alignment. This does depend on scoping and how to define the task/process.</li>
<li>It will be a lot of work to categorize each test with an impact level and the functional needs affected. It maybe best to focus on the critical issues. It would also be best to do the categorization as we go along, when creating tests.</li>
<li>Severity rating could contribute towards scoring, but there are many other questions to do with scoring.</li>
<li>Severity rating could also contribute towards prioritization, which could replace A/AA/AAA (at the test level)</li>
</ol>

<div class="note">
<h5>Proposed updates</h5>

<ul>
<li>For the process of creating this: focus on critical issues. Don't try to rate high / medium / low.</li>
<li>Use the critical severity matrix to categorize tests. (At least set up that process to define each test by functional need and impact).</li>
<li>We could use Critical / High for a level of conformance. For example:
<ul>
<li>"Bronze" could be an absence of any critical or high issues;</li>
<li>"Silver" could be an absence of any critical, high, or medium issues.</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>We could use the severity scales as input to a post-testing process where you prioritize issues based on your context and tasks.</li>
</ul>
</div>
</section>
</section>
<section>
<h2 id="design_principles">Design Principles</h2>
Expand Down