WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: WCAG 2.0 Compliance criteria for internal or nonpublic websites

for

From: Cliff Tyllick
Date: Dec 9, 2009 3:39PM

At 12:24 PM December 9, Sam S <EMAIL REMOVED> explained:
I had asked this query as sometimes, companies which are in the early
stages of accessibility implementation prefer to start by implementing
only critical accessibility features based on requirements. In such a
case I wanted to know what level of compliance a website can claim.
Cliff answers:

Sam, it all depends on what the company has chosen to consider its "critical accessibility features." You would have to evaluate the resulting state of the website against WCAG 2.0 (or Section 508, if that is your standard) to determine level of compliance.

Having said that, I hope you understand a point that many of us on this list hope you are getting. That is, it's better to focus on how much accessibility you can achieve than how little accessibility you can get away with.

For example, let's imagine that a client's website is completely inaccessible -- no heading tags, no alt text on images, lists made to look like lists without using the right tags, the whole bit.

Trying to cut costs, the client might be tempted to identify just one thing to fix in the first pass. In this case, they might decide to fix the headings and leave everything else alone. Perhaps that would be less work. But would it really cost less? Probably not.

At some point, someone will want to edit a list. If the list were coded properly, that would be easy. But with the improper coding, a whole Web page might collapse as they try to revise that one critical item. Or someone might like an image -- a photo, perhaps -- and want to reuse it elsewhere. But the photo doesn't have enough identifying information to let them know if it really fits in the new setting. If the original photo had had good alt text, that might not be a problem.

Obviously, this is a highly oversimplified example. But the simple truth is that the value of accessible content is so much greater, and the costs of maintaining that content so much smaller, that it's foolish to start out by asking, "How little is enough?"

The right questions to ask all begin with "If we did this the right way ... ." And they end with questions like these:
1. What would we end up with?
2. How would having that help us, other than achieving compliance?
3. What would the logical steps from here to there be?
4. How much of that investment can we afford to make now?

Get them to think of the big picture. Don't let them be penny wise and pound foolish.



Cliff Tyllick
Usability specialist and Web development coordinator
Agency Communications Division
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality
512-239-4516
<EMAIL REMOVED>