E-mail List Archives

Re: 508 asks for a VPAT what does W3C have that's similar

for

From: Balakumar Sujatha [Contractor]
Date: Oct 31, 2013 6:36AM


Lucy,

The most important thing to do in the RFP is to ensure that the contract is strong and you specify a WCAG 2.0 test plan as part of the deliverables and acceptance criteria. Your best bet would be to incorporate adherence to WCAG 2.0 in the contract. The burden now falls on the vendors to be WCAG 2.0 compliant as they are contractually bound. The vendor should fill a 508/accessibility test plan on completion of contract to state how the end deliverable is WCAG 2.0 compliant.

In terms of evaluating vendors, ask the vendors for capability statement - that states how the vendor is going to accomplish WCAG 2.0 technical requirements. This is a good way to evaluate the vendors knowledge and capability. The person who evaluates these statements should have decent knowledge of accessibility of course.

A VPAT is just voluntary and not contractually binding. Hope this helps.

Sujatha

> -----Original Message-----
> From: <EMAIL REMOVED>
> [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Lucy Greco
> Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2013 2:06 PM
> To: WebAIM Discussion List
> Subject: [WebAIM] 508 asks for a VPAT what does W3C have that's
> similar
> Importance: High
>
> Hello:
> As some of you may be aware UC just past a new access policy that
> requires W3c 2.0 as for any new development and or purchases. And I
> have been asked to participate in the first RFP that will be requiring this.
> it's so new I don't have any documentation created yet about How to
> look for and or check for this standard when evaluating venders. That
> long winded explanation is to ask what if anything is the equivalent
> of the VPAT for W3C 2.0 a and or aa or aaa thanks Lucy
>
> Lucia Greco
> Web Access Analyst
> IST-Campus Technology Services
> University of California, Berkeley
> (510) 289-6008 skype: lucia1-greco
> http://webaccess.berkeley.edu
> Follow me on twitter @accessaces
> > > list messages to <EMAIL REMOVED>
> > > list messages to <EMAIL REMOVED>
> > > list messages to <EMAIL REMOVED>
>