WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: It's Official - New Sec. 508 is out

for

From: Jonathan Avila
Date: Mar 19, 2015 8:00AM

> > In light of this, recommendations should focus on improving their processes for timely review and updates. For instance, perhaps annual review of incorporated standards could result in a quicker update process because it would

Yes, this is true -- now the task is to think about how we help organizations and governments reduce the amount of time it takes to adopt a standard. There were some ideas bounced around at CSUN that are just ideas. For example, what if accessibility standards had modules or extensions that wouldn't change the base rule. Perhaps these extensions or modules could be adopted with greater ease than having to get consensus on a voluntary standard and then have organizations/governments representatives review the new standard. This is somewhat similar to how WCAG has different levels A, AA, AAA but would help address changing technologies such as mobile, etc. I suppose there is always a concern that the lowest common denominator would be selected.

The challenge of potential new versions of standards is not only with WCAG but for the PDF and PDF/UA specifications too. User agent and authoring tool guidelines are also in the mix.

Jonathan

-- 
Jonathan Avila 
Chief Accessibility Officer
SSB BART Group 
<EMAIL REMOVED>
Phone 703.637.8957  
Follow us: Facebook | Twitter | LinkedIn | Blog | Newsletter


-----Original Message-----
From: <EMAIL REMOVED> [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Cliff Tyllick
Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2015 9:34 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] It's Official - New Sec. 508 is out

Well said!

Yes, states do this, too. Like it or not, it's poor public policy to cede any determination of the nature or extent of rules to an authority outside the government.

For example, even states that don't (still) claim that they can nullify federal law or secede from the union will not adopt Section 508 by reference, except in an already adopted form through that state's own processes for making rules.

For all the cry about "harmonization," there is only so far our choirs can go.

Cliff Tyllick

Sent from my iPhone
Although its spellcheck often saves me, all goofs in sent messages are its fault.

> On Mar 19, 2015, at 8:07 AM, Bourne, Sarah (ITD) < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>
> Reviving an old thread. Jon was considering a recommendation to reference "the latest version" instead of specific version of standards incorporated by reference. I have found the reason why they are not doing this:
>
> "The Board cannot accept the suggestion of software industry
> representatives that the proposed rule permit compliance with any follow-on versions of WCAG 2.0. Federal agencies cannot "dynamically" incorporate by reference future editions of consensus standards. Such action is legally prohibited since it would, among other things, unlawfully delegate the government's regulatory authority to standards development organizations, as well as bypass rulemaking requirements (which would typically include a public notice‐and‐comment period). Federal agencies are required to identify the particular version of consensus standards incorporated by reference in a regulation. When an updated edition of a consensus standard is published, the agency must revise its regulation if it seeks to incorporate any of the new material. Nevertheless, the Access Board plans to remain abreast of updates to voluntary consensus standards bearing on ICT, and will consider incorpo rating them into future rulemakings, as appropriate."
> (Source: page 23 of the PDF version of the NPRM,
> http://www.access-board.gov/attachments/article/1702/ict-proposed-rule
> .pdf)
>
> This includes a link to a footnote:
> "See, e.g., 1 C.F.R. § 51.1(f) (2014) ("Incorporation by reference of a publication is limited to the edition of the publication that is approved [by the Office of Federal Register]. Future amendments or revisions of the publication are not included."); Office of Mgmt. & Budget, Exec. Office of the President, OMB Circular A-119, Federal Participation in the Development and Use of Voluntary Consensus Standards and in Conformity Assessment Activities (1998); see also Nat'l Archives & Records Admin., Federal Register Document Drafting Handbook, Ch. 6 (April 2014 Revision)."
>
> In light of this, recommendations should focus on improving their processes for timely review and updates. For instance, perhaps annual review of incorporated standards could result in a quicker update process because it would limit the areas of concern. More substantive updates, such as including a new standard, could happen on a more deliberative track.
>
> sb
> Sarah E. Bourne
> Director of IT Accessibility, MassIT
> Commonwealth of Massachusetts
> 1 Ashburton Pl. rm 1601 Boston MA 02108
> 617-626-4502
> <EMAIL REMOVED>
> http://www.mass.gov/MassIT
>
> > > list messages to <EMAIL REMOVED>