WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: W3C structure, Standards bodies, and more (wasHow is PDF accessibility evaluated?)

for

From: John Foliot
Date: Feb 6, 2015 7:56PM

Ron wrote:
>
> Standard proposing and standard setting are two very different things.
> By the charter of the W3C this is very clear.

Standard "setting" is a legislative function - and to be clear the
legislative process can either adopt an existing "standard" (WCAG 2) or
create their own it they choose (Section 508, UK's BS 8878:2010). In that
regard, the W3C is not involved. Technical Standards creation however very
much is the role of the W3C.


>
> As usual the rest of your comments support my comments. And as usual
> you have missed the point of my comments.

What is/was your point? That the W3C isn't the same as the U.S. Access
Board? OK, agreed. But the W3C DOES create standards, a point that your
comment obfuscated. "Boards" is a very US-centric term, and other
legislative constructs for implementing and enforcing standards (technical
or otherwise) exist in locales outside of the USA, and even then that is
with regard to legal remedies for non-compliance (important in the
accessibility space).

However organizations *can* adopt standards unrelated to legal obligations,
and as I noted, enforcement and consequences of non-compliance are not the
responsibility of the standard, nor of its originating standards body.

>
> I am not going to get into another public debate with you on things.
> The facts speak for themselves.

Wow Ron, calm down. What facts did you offer? I explained, and provided
links. Clarification for all is a good thing, no?

JF

>
> Ron Stewart
> On Feb 6, 2015 8:23 PM, "John Foliot" < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>
> > Ron wrote:
> > >
> > > The W3C is the developer of specifications for web based content.
> > > They are not a standards board.
> >
> > I'm afraid I must correct Ron - the W3C is most certainly a standards
> > creating
> > organization:
> >
> > "W3C standards define an Open Web Platform for application
> > development that has the unprecedented potential to enable developers
> > to build rich interactive experiences, powered by vast data stores,
> > that are available on any device."
> > (source: http://www.w3.org/standards/)
> >
> > The W3C is also recognized as a standards creating body by other such
> > organizations, and has formal agreements in place with other
> standards
> > bodies such as the ISO.
> > (see: http://www.w3.org/2001/11/StdLiaison#dejure)
> >
> > To be overly pedantic, the W3C produces "Recommendations", which is
> > simply their internal nomenclature for Standards, and a visit to the
> > W3C web site will find multiple references to both terms:
> > http://www.w3.org/standards/faq
> >
> >
> >
> > > There are actually several different standards organization's in
> > > this space both domestically and internationally.
> >
> > Correct, for example IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force - who
> > produce RFC's - which are their term for standards), ECMA (European
> > Computer Manufacturers Association - the standards org for
> > JavaScript), SMPTE (Society of Motion Picture and Television
> > Engineers), AES (Audio Engineering Society), and others.
> >
> > Fortunately for us, these organizations are all "friendly" with each
> > other, and in large organizations it is not surprising to see the
> same
> > individuals show up at multiple standards bodies. As well, there are
> > instances of "cross-body" work, for example the .png graphic format
> > (http://www.w3.org/TR/PNG/) [if you reference that link, look under
> "2.
> > Normative References" to see the inter-mingling of standards bodies
> > and their standards involved in the PNG standard]
> >
> >
> > Meanwhile, "Chagnon | PubCom" < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Susan wrote: "So I shouldn't be using the WCAG guidelines (and I
> > > > thought the W3 was a standards board) at all?"
> > > >
> > > > WAI is the standards board for accessibility, under the larger
> W3C
> > > > organization.
> > > > WCAG are the guidelines developed by the WAI.
> >
> > Close enough. WAI is a "Program Office" at the W3C chartered to
> > oversee the "accessibility space"
> > (http://www.w3.org/WAI/IPO/Activity), and multiple Working Groups are
> > chartered to do the standards development work, overseen by the WAI
> > Coordination Group (http://www.w3.org/WAI/CG/).
> >
> > WCAG, and related documents are produced by the Web Content
> Guidelines
> > Working Group, who's charter is here:
> > http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/new-charter.html
> >
> > Non-standards related work coordinated by WAI include Education and
> > Outreach and the WAI Interest Group, which "maintains a public
> > discussion forum on web accessibility, provides a forum for exchange
> > of information on web accessibility..."
> >
> >
> > > >
> > > > On the other hand, the PDF UA is an ISO standard; ISO = the
> > > > International Standards Organization.
> >
> > Just to be clear, WCAG 2 is an ISO standard as well: ISO/IEC
> > 40500:2012 (
> >
> http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm
> > ?csnumber=58625
> > )
> >
> > From the ISO: "WCAG 2.0 success criteria are written as testable
> > statements that are not technology-specific. Guidance about
> satisfying
> > the success criteria in specific technologies, as well as general
> > information about interpreting the success criteria, is provided in
> separate documents."
> >
> > > > One more quirk in all this:
> > > > -- W3C sets the standards for HTML, so they can write any
> > > > standards and guidelines they want to cover websites.
> > > > -- But Acrobat PDF is controlled by Adobe, MS Word et al by
> > > Microsoft.
> >
> > Actually, the PDF standard has been an open standard since July 1,
> > 2008, and published by the International Organization for
> > Standardization as ISO 32000-1:2008. While Adobe has contributed
> > significantly to the standard, they don't "control" it.
> >
> > As well, Microsoft's Word application produces documents that are
> > based upon the Open Document Format for Office Applications (ODF),
> and
> > authors can actually export/save Word Docs with the OTD filename
> > extension. (ODF is also an ISO Standard)
> > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument
> >
> >
> > > > So an outsider like the W3C can't tell these 2 corporations what
> > > > to
> > > do
> > > > with their software and proprietary formats.
> >
> > Correct, but other standards bodies CAN [sic] - the standards exist,
> > but it is enforcement, especially with regard to creating accessible
> > content in those formats, that remains the biggest issue. Expecting
> > the W3C to police that mess however is both unfair to the W3C, and
> > unrealistic.
> >
> > Again, to be clear, standards bodies, be it the W3C, or any of the
> > other standards bodies referenced here, are not in the job of
> policing
> > or enforcing adherence to their standards - they publish them (and
> > effectively all standards bodies come to their standards through some
> > form of agreement/consensus process), and then they encourage users
> > (authors, tool manufacturers, etc.) to conform to those standards,
> but
> > no-one is obligated to do so.
> >
> > Enforcement to adherence is a legislative responsibility (so get off
> > your back-end US Access Board), and internally within any
> organization
> > adoption of, and adherence to, standards must be a policy decision
> for
> > that organization, and monitoring for compliance (and consequences of
> > non-compliance) remain the responsibility of that organization.
> >
> > Anyway, if you've made it this far, you've likely learned more than
> > you thought you wanted to. If you have any questions, happy to try
> and
> > assist - you can reply to this email thread or write me off-line.
> >
> > Cheers!
> >
> > JF
> > Standards Weenie First-Class :-)
> >
> >
> > > > > > list messages to <EMAIL REMOVED>
> >
> > > messages to <EMAIL REMOVED>