-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 42
WCAG 3 Topics for Discussion
These discussion topics need to be addressed and resolved before WCAG 3 can be published.
Topics that have been resolved can be reopened with sufficient technical justification.
| Accessibility Supported Topic | History | Status | Next Steps |
|---|---|---|---|
| How comprehensive (across language, OS, browser, etc) does support need to be before guidance is not needed or before the author can assume passing without further effort? |
GitHub Discussion
|
Schedule for AG discussion |
| Accessibility Supported Topic | History | Status | Next Steps |
|---|---|---|---|
| How comprehensive (across language, OS, browser, etc) does support need to be before guidance is not needed or before the author can assume passing without further effort? | GitHub Discussion Surveys Minutes | Schedule for AG discussion | |
| How do we write WCAG 3 and supporting materials so that as coverage increases or when coverage is universal within a closed ecosystem, the user agent and AT support can be claimed as conforming even if the author did nothing? | GitHub Discussion Surveys Minutes | Resolved: Outcome centered requirements framed as “available” rather than “provided” Finalized in 3 March Draft | Discuss any additional or replacement solutions if they are brought to the group. |
| How do we evaluate/address situations where the code is correct but the AT it is used with (or user agent AT combo) doesn't work? | GitHub Discussion Surveys Minutes | Schedule for AG discussion | |
| COGA tools have unique needs and barriers regarding accessibility supported that need to be captured (for example not being able to install the tools they need, greater variety in tools, using the library to access content). Capture and address these. | GitHub Discussion Surveys Minutes |
| Conformance Topic | History | Status | Next Steps |
|---|---|---|---|
| What conformance model will we use? | GitHub Discussion - TBD Surveys TBD Minutes TBD | FPWD model raised concerns about the work to count instances. Current draft includes an initial proposed model but working group is currently exploring alternatives. | Reach consensus on what falls inside and outside of conformance. |
| Can we require conformance claims be machine readable so that any organization that makes a claim also log it in a machine readable way (APA)? | GitHub Discussion TBD Surveys TBD Minutes TBD | ||
| Should user testing be explicitly called out as a way of testing to conform? | GitHub Discussion TBD Surveys TBD Minutes TBD | Schedule for AG discussion | |
| Which terminology to use: “Partial conformance” vs. “Partial nonconformance” | GitHub Discussion TBD Surveys TBD Minutes TBD | Schedule for AG discussion |
| Internationalization Topic | History | Status | |
|---|---|---|---|
| How can we write WCAG 3 or supplemental documentation to better support larger / fast changing web sites and applications? | GitHub Discussion TBD Surveys TBD Minutes TBD | ||
| How can we write WCAG 3 to support small sites? | GitHub Discussion TBD Surveys TBD Minutes TBD | ||
| How do we support evolving technologies? | GitHub Discussion TBD Surveys TBD Minutes TBD | Resolved: Writing technology neutral provisions, technology specific methods and tests. |
| Internationalization Topic | History | Status | |
|---|---|---|---|
| How can we support internationalization of WCAG 3? | GitHub Discussion TBD Surveys TBD Minutes TBD | After exploring registries and guardrail languages, the current suggestion is to republish WCAG 3 when enough research is available to add requirements for additional languages. Languages that do not have research to support the provision would pass the provision by default. | Schedule for AG discussion |
| How do we promote research in non-English language and alphabets? | GitHub Discussion TBD Surveys TBD Minutes TBD | Draft calls out need for research in provisions that are language/alphabet dependent. | Staff/chairs are working to identify partners in various languages and document research needed. |
| How do we write guidance that depends on certain contexts (e.g., human language, design differences)? | GitHub Discussion TBD Surveys TBD Minutes TBD |
| Use Generated Topic | History | Status | Next Steps |
|---|---|---|---|
| How can we best integrate Authoring tool guidance (ATAG) into WCAG 3? | GitHub Discussion TBD Surveys TBD Minutes TBD | ATAG working group is being stood up. Current suggestion is reference it within methods and state in the conformance section that if an application meets the ATAG related methods, then it conforms. |
| 3rd Party Content Topic | History | Status | Next Steps |
|---|---|---|---|
| How do we clearly denote responsibility for third party content, while encouraging its continued improvement? Note: WCAG 2 allows for partial conformance when third party content is used and can’t be tested. | GitHub Discussion TBD Surveys TBD Minutes TBD |
| Policy Topic | History | Status | Next Steps |
|---|---|---|---|
| What considerations are there for uptake in a policy environment? | GitHub Discussion TBD Surveys TBD Minutes TBD | Conformance subgroup has begun collecting content for policy work. | Schedule for AG discussion |
| How do we bridge the gap between WCAG 2's conformance model on pages and legislators asking for conforming websites? | GitHub Discussion TBD Surveys TBD Minutes TBD |
| Assertion Topic | History | Status | Next Steps |
|---|---|---|---|
| Can assertions be part of the core level (required for conformance?) | GitHub Discussion TBD Surveys TBD Minutes TBD | Group leaning towards no, they can be supplemental but not core. | Schedule for AG Discussion |
| If metadata outside the content itself is needed to validate a test, how is that reported? | GitHub Discussion TBD Surveys TBD Minutes TBD |
| Testing Methodology Topic | History | Status | Next Steps |
|---|---|---|---|
| How do we improve the equity of the guidance between different disability types, now and in the future, while preserving a reasonable effort bar for conformance? | |||
| How do we reduce or avoid dramatically increasing the cost of testing (e.g. encourage automated testing without reducing the accessibility from manual testing?) | |||
| How do we increase testability of guidance? | Resolved: Break provisions into more granular and explicit pieces. Work to map requirements to ACT rules. | ||
| Make sure that tests do not rely on assumptions of the newest or any specific technology to pass. | |||
| How does user testing get incorporated into testing methodology? |
| Equity Topic | History | Status | Next Steps |
|---|---|---|---|
| How do we make it easier for people with disabilities to learn about the accessibility of web sites and web apps? | GitHub Discussion TBD Surveys TBD Minutes TBD | ||
| Can WCAG 3's conformance modal be updated regularly to continually improve equity? | GitHub Discussion TBD Surveys TBD Minutes TBD |
| Adoption Topic | History | Status | Next Steps |
|---|---|---|---|
| How can we best provide an introduction to WCAG 3 in plain language to help policy makers and others understand what WCAG 3 is and is not? | GitHub Discussion TBD Surveys TBD Minutes TBD | ||
| How do we design WCAG to encourage continued improvement while recognizing less than perfect accessibility commonly occurs? | GitHub Discussion TBD Surveys TBD Minutes TBD | ||
| How do we make WCAG 3 easier for beginners? | GitHub Discussion TBD Surveys TBD Minutes TBD | ||
| How do we ensure a smooth and speedy transition from WCAG 2 to WCAG 3 in areas such as education, | GitHub Discussion TBD Surveys TBD Minutes TBD | Partial decision: Provide a mapping between WCAG 2 and WCAG 3 |
WCAG3 is a project of the W3C Accessibility Guidelines Working Group (AGWG). Research and prototyping was done by the Silver Task Force. Archival and additional material for this project can be found on the Silver wiki and the Silver Github wiki.
This Wiki page is edited by participants of the Accessibility Guidelines Working Group. It does not necessarily represent consensus and it may have incorrect information or information that is not supported by other Working Group participants, WAI, or W3C. It may also have some very useful information.
- Outcome List by Categories from 2024 Card Sort
- Focus Appearance Outcome Scratchpad (Exploratory to Developing)
- Guideline List
- AGWG TPAC 2024 - a slide deck with links to the the conformance work at 2024 W3C TPAC Face to Face Meeting.
- Conformance Proposal Comparison -- 2024 Q2 table comparing essential parts of different proposals.
- Draft of Analyzing Conformance Options - Feb-Apr 2024
- Conformance Archive and Proposals from 2018 to present
- Guidance for Policy Makers Subgroup
- Early proposal for decision tree based conformance - early thoughts on what a decision tree could look like in a conformance proposal.
These links leave WCAG3 for archived Silver github wiki. Permissions may differ.