Understanding WCAG 2.1 docs still incorrectly say WCAG 2.0

[patrickhlauke]

In various places like https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG21/Understanding/conformance it still refers to 2.0. This may be due to the fact that some of the documents appear "shared" in the source folder here between 2.0 and 2.1 https://github.com/w3c/wcag/tree/master/understanding

It's likely that to properly fix this (also in light of 2.2), we'd want to make completely separate copies/versions of these common files and keep them in the separate 2.0, 2.1, 2.2 etc folders (and then make sure each version's documents state the correct WCAG version number, to avoid this sort of confusion/mixed signals)

[guyhickling]

It's likely that to properly fix this (also in light of 2.2), we'd want to make completely separate copies/versions of these common files and keep them in the separate 2.0, 2.1, 2.2 etc folders

The only problem with that solution is that every time a change is made to a file, it will have to be made to all three versions. That never works - a time comes when people forget, or update it wrongly. Whatever, it becomes three times the amount of work to change things. It also makes it much harder for the users, if they want to see what has changed between versions, as they have to compare documents.

The rule in IT is, NEVER have multiple versions where one will do. Far better to find an alternative solution.

Instead, for each document, the safer and easier way would be to make just one document version as the master copy to serve all the WCAG 2.x versions. Edit it to show where something only applies to 2.1 and later, or to just one WCAG version. So you might add phrases like "For WCAG 2.1 the following applies:" or "(This sentence/paragraph does not apply to WCAG 2.0)".

For example, in the 2.4.7 change from AA to A, in its Understanding doc where it shows at the top "Success Criterion 2.4.7 Focus Visible (Level AA):", you would either change the "(Level AA)" to something like

(Level AA in WCAG 2.0 and 2.1, Level A in WCAG 2.2 onward)

or delete the phrase from its current position and show the above wording on a separate line below the paragraph.

Yes, that's longer wording, but it:

• saves a whole load of work maintaining separate versions
• avoids any possibility of mistakes and discrepancies between versions
• and is much easier for the users too as they can see at a glance where a change has occurred, and exactly what it is. They won't have to tediously compare document versions and read everything too or three times over in three different documents to work out what has happened.

That's much easier for you, and much easier for the users, and safer all round!

[patrickhlauke]

The only problem with that solution is that every time a change is made to a file, it will have to be made to all three versions

only if there's a decision that new changes need to be backported to older versions. at some point there should be a decision of "no, we're not going to change this in old versions of WCAG. they're now 'done' and changes - unless absolutely critical because they show a serious flaw - are only going to show in the newest version".

isn't that the whole point of versioning a standard?

[yatil]

I still see people referring to 2008 Working Drafts of Techniques all the time because they come up so high in Google (or have come up in the past and people bookmarked them).

Generally one version should be good for everything, unless the text of an SC changes in a way where the Understanding/Technique needs to change to reflect that change. Conforming to 1.1.1 in WCAG 2.1 is the same as conforming to it in WCAG 2.0 and 2.2 and probably 2.9 😉.

People should not know that they could get better/updated information in a later version of the spec’s Understanding.

What we need is a clear marking on what applies to what, I think the level change can just be addressed as mentioned above, and the paragraph that applies to 2.2 would easily be addressable with “In WCAG 2.2,…”

[patrickhlauke]

People should not know that they could get better/updated information in a later version of the spec’s Understanding

that works out when the understanding refers to the same SC. but obviously once SCs drift/change slightly, new advice may not actually apply to old versions of the SC.

at some point, you have to freeze the old WCAG SCs and its related understanding etc in amber, call it done. and, as happens with other specs, perhaps add an automatic notification at the top a la "this refers to WCAG 2.0. for the latest advice for WCAG 2.2, see ..."

[yatil]

I agree, at some point that's the better way to move forward for individual SCs.

[yatil]

https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG21/Understanding/conformance still says WCAG 2.0 instead of WCAG 2. This issue is open since March. Whenever I cite these documents I have to add a note that says that there is an error on the page and that it actually really, please believe me, also applies to WCAG 2.1. I know that you all have lots on your plates, but please make everyone’s lives easier for accessibility. We don’t need to sabotage our own community.

[yatil]

Oh, I missed the 1 year errorversary of this issue.

[missmatsuko]

I think this is a related issue. When I go to WCAG 2.1 Understanding Success Criterion 2.4.7: Focus Visible, the SC is stated to be Level A when it is actually Level AA in WCAG 2.1. This is pretty confusing.

[yatil]

@missmatsuko Yes, this is indeed a related issue: #1178