Comments on: WCAG 2.0 - A Failure In The Making? http://blackwidows.co.uk/blog/2006/05/23/wcag-20-a-failure-in-the-making/ The meanderings of a black widow... Fri, 21 Nov 2008 12:11:38 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Aaron http://blackwidows.co.uk/blog/2006/05/23/wcag-20-a-failure-in-the-making/#comment-2334 Aaron Mon, 03 Jul 2006 14:53:15 +0000 http://www.blackwidows.co.uk/blog/?p=58#comment-2334 I liked reading your blog ! I liked reading your blog !

]]> By: Administrator http://blackwidows.co.uk/blog/2006/05/23/wcag-20-a-failure-in-the-making/#comment-2122 Administrator Fri, 26 May 2006 10:01:00 +0000 http://www.blackwidows.co.uk/blog/?p=58#comment-2122 The problem when producing a plain-english guide will be how some parts of WCAG 2.0 should be interpreted. I think we're going to find that different people will apply quite different interpretations to some checkpoints. There's nothing new in that. Developers have been arguing over some points within WCAG 1.0 for years and, although some of that discussion is healthy and probably lends itself to a deeper understanding of the principles behind the guidelines, I had hoped that WCAG 2.0 would clarify some issues - not make things worse. The problem when producing a plain-english guide will be how some parts of WCAG 2.0 should be interpreted. I think we’re going to find that different people will apply quite different interpretations to some checkpoints. There’s nothing new in that. Developers have been arguing over some points within WCAG 1.0 for years and, although some of that discussion is healthy and probably lends itself to a deeper understanding of the principles behind the guidelines, I had hoped that WCAG 2.0 would clarify some issues - not make things worse.

]]> By: Dan http://blackwidows.co.uk/blog/2006/05/23/wcag-20-a-failure-in-the-making/#comment-2113 Dan Thu, 25 May 2006 16:25:57 +0000 http://www.blackwidows.co.uk/blog/?p=58#comment-2113 Spot on Mel. The single greatest worry for me is that WCAG 2.0 will alienate those developers who are just starting to learn about accessibility. WCAG 1 isn't perfect, but at least it's straightforward. Anyone can understand the concepts of guidelines, techniques and conformance levels, i.e. the important bits. WCAG 2.0 on the other hand seems to do its darnedest to hide the important bits. If I was starting out now there is absolutely no way I'd wade through the new documents. No doubt some kind soul will produce a plain-english, simple-person's guide to it in due course, but it will too late for many. Spot on Mel. The single greatest worry for me is that WCAG 2.0 will alienate those developers who are just starting to learn about accessibility. WCAG 1 isn’t perfect, but at least it’s straightforward. Anyone can understand the concepts of guidelines, techniques and conformance levels, i.e. the important bits. WCAG 2.0 on the other hand seems to do its darnedest to hide the important bits. If I was starting out now there is absolutely no way I’d wade through the new documents. No doubt some kind soul will produce a plain-english, simple-person’s guide to it in due course, but it will too late for many.

]]> By: Blair Millen http://blackwidows.co.uk/blog/2006/05/23/wcag-20-a-failure-in-the-making/#comment-2109 Blair Millen Thu, 25 May 2006 10:21:28 +0000 http://www.blackwidows.co.uk/blog/?p=58#comment-2109 Of course, the 'baselines' will need to be set by a responsible web site owner. It shouldn't be any different to the way things are presently done (if they are done properly that is). If the site is intended for the widest possible audience and the site uses Flash, then obviously the site owner needs to provide an alternative. Of course, the ‘baselines’ will need to be set by a responsible web site owner. It shouldn’t be any different to the way things are presently done (if they are done properly that is). If the site is intended for the widest possible audience and the site uses Flash, then obviously the site owner needs to provide an alternative.

]]> By: Administrator http://blackwidows.co.uk/blog/2006/05/23/wcag-20-a-failure-in-the-making/#comment-2108 Administrator Thu, 25 May 2006 08:06:16 +0000 http://www.blackwidows.co.uk/blog/?p=58#comment-2108 If user agents ever do reach the point of 'reading' what a given site needs in the way of technology, how does this help the user? Especially if they don't have access to technology X? Looking at 'baselines' from this angle, my concern would be that we would have simply taken all of the "This site requires Flash 8" (and similar) messages off the screens only to place them in machine-readable messages. It doesn't solve the problem - just shifts responsibility of informing the user from the site to the user agent. Added to which, site owners, having been lured into feeling that they have Done The Right Thing by WCAG 2.0 in providing a baseline, might be even less inclined to tackle the root issue i.e. opening their site up to the widest possible audience. If user agents ever do reach the point of ‘reading’ what a given site needs in the way of technology, how does this help the user? Especially if they don’t have access to technology X?

Looking at ‘baselines’ from this angle, my concern would be that we would have simply taken all of the “This site requires Flash 8″ (and similar) messages off the screens only to place them in machine-readable messages. It doesn’t solve the problem - just shifts responsibility of informing the user from the site to the user agent. Added to which, site owners, having been lured into feeling that they have Done The Right Thing by WCAG 2.0 in providing a baseline, might be even less inclined to tackle the root issue i.e. opening their site up to the widest possible audience.

]]> By: Blair Millen http://blackwidows.co.uk/blog/2006/05/23/wcag-20-a-failure-in-the-making/#comment-2094 Blair Millen Wed, 24 May 2006 06:49:56 +0000 http://www.blackwidows.co.uk/blog/?p=58#comment-2094 I was at a <acronym title="Scottish Usability Professionals Association">SUPA</acronym> meeting last night which covered WCAG 2.0. And one interesting area that was mentioned was 'baselines'. From what I gather, when a 'government body, client, organization, author, or combination of these' set a baseline, the are simply creating a string which defines the technologies they expect people to use. At the moment this string is not machine-readable, so what atually happens or who actually uses this string is still a little confusing to me. But, the idea that this string may be accessible by user agents, almost like a DOCTYPE, sounds interesting. Perhaps we'll soon be looking at messages delivered from user agents advising us that a certain website needs a certain technology? I was at a SUPA meeting last night which covered WCAG 2.0. And one interesting area that was mentioned was ‘baselines’. From what I gather, when a ‘government body, client, organization, author, or combination of these’ set a baseline, the are simply creating a string which defines the technologies they expect people to use. At the moment this string is not machine-readable, so what atually happens or who actually uses this string is still a little confusing to me. But, the idea that this string may be accessible by user agents, almost like a DOCTYPE, sounds interesting. Perhaps we’ll soon be looking at messages delivered from user agents advising us that a certain website needs a certain technology?

]]>