WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: WCAG and various Laws

for

From: Geof Collis
Date: Mar 30, 2010 3:12PM

There is the Common Look and Feel which is Federal, but up here
we're a bit anal at times. :O)

cheers

Geof

At 03:55 PM 3/30/2010, you wrote:
>I find it interesting that in Canada web accessibility is being dealt with
>on a provincial level rather than something that is uniform throughout
>Canada. Let me know if I'm not totally understanding this.
>Chuck
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Geof Collis" < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
>To: "WebAIM Discussion List" < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
>Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 7:12 AM
>Subject: Re: [WebAIM] WCAG and various Laws
>
>
> > Thanks to all the responses, I was hoping that I could find some
> > concrete information that WCAG 2.0 Level AA was the benchmark around
> > the World for compliance to use in my argument to our
> > Provincial Governments upcoming Law for web accessibility, you might
> > remember me saying they are debating whether to stop at Level A as
> > the minimum. A number of groups are lobbying them to go to Level AA.
> >
> > I seem to remember reading an article where Sweden or some country
> > upped theirs from A to AA recently, will have to go looking for it.
> >
> > cheers
> >
> > Geof
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > At 09:58 AM 3/30/2010, you wrote:
> >> >
> >> > The COI guidance to UK government departments has been updated to read
> >> > "Compliance with the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines is acceptable
> >> > at
> >> > Level Double-A of version 1.0 or the equivalent level in version 2.0."
> >> >
> >>
> >>Thanks for that Steve - must have missed that one being issued *looks
> >>rather
> >>sheep-faced*!
> >>
> >>That is however only aimed at the public sector websites - the Code of
> >>Practice that goes along with the DDA is a different set of documents.
> >>The
> >>latest CoPs can be found here:
> >>http://www.equalityhumanrights.com/advice-and-guidance/information
> -for-advisers/codes-of-practice/
> >>
> >>Regarding the debate on what is "equivalent" between WCAG 1.0 and 2.0 -
> >>the
> >>technical detail is a little bit of a mute point, although it obviously
> >>needs to be addressed if you are moving the compliance focus from one to
> >>the
> >>other. AA from WCAG 1.0 is the same as AA in WCAG 2.0 in the broad terms
> >>of
> >>which disability groups it is trying to cater for, which in my opinion, is
> >>the most important factor when addressing accessibility rather than
> >>looking
> >>at individual checkpoints.
> >>
> >>
> >>