WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: WebAIM-Forum Digest, Vol 125, Issue 19

for

From: Léonie Watson
Date: Aug 20, 2015 2:49PM

> From: Laura Carlson [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ]
> Sent: 20 August 2015 19:35
> One thing to remember is that nothing is stopping entities, including legal
> entities from mandating WCAG 2.0 plus an extensions as soon as said
> extension is available.

Good point. That could happen of course. In the scheme of things I'm not too worried about legislation though. I am worried that if these extensions are optional, it sends out the message that accessibility for those user groups is optional.

>
> You will note that in section 3.2 "Dependencies & Liaisons" of the draft
> charter the following groups are listed:
>
> * U.S. Access Board
> * European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI)
> * European Committee for Standardization (CEN)
> * European Commission
> * RERC for the Advancement of Cognitive Technologies
> * RERC on Universal Interface and Information Technology Access
>

I think that W3C should leave the matter of law and policy to the entities responsible for those things. Our responsibility is to create standards that equip designers and developers with the best possible information, not to harmonise those standards into legislation.

> From what I have gathered going the extension route is expected to be
> faster than a WCAG 2.1 or 3.0.

I think that is the assumption, yes. I don't think it needs to be the case though.

Léonie.


--
Senior accessibility engineer @PacielloGroup @LeonieWatson