The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) requests public comments on the Draft of Promoting Access to Voting: Recommendations for Addressing Barriers to Private and Independent Voting for People with Disabilities. Under Executive Order 14019 on Promoting Access to Voting, NIST is directed to identify barriers to private and independent voting for people with disabilities, make recommendations to remove these barriers, and evaluate the steps needed to ensure that the online Federal Voter Registration Form is accessible to people with disabilities. The Draft is available in the Federal Register.
The Draft was developed by NIST using information collected through the Request for Information that was published in the Federal Register on June 16, 2021, reviews of reports, papers and other literature, and engagement with stakeholder organizations and election officials. NIST is seeking comment on the Draft from persons with disabilities, disability advocacy groups, assistive technology vendors and professionals, non-partisan voting promotion groups, voting technology vendors, election officials, and other stakeholders.
Public comments must be received by 5:00 pm ET on November 22, 2021. Comments may be submitted at www.regulations.gov under NIST-2021-0005-0001 or by email at pva-eo@list.nist.gov. Complete instructions for comment submission can be found in the Federal Register notice. For questions about this request for public comment, contact Kevin Mangold, NIST, by phone at 1-301-975-5628 or email Kevin.Mangold@nist.gov. Users of telecommunication devices for the deaf, or a text telephone, may call the Federal Relay Service at 1-800-877-8339.
You are welcome to submit suggestions and comments for the U.S. Access Board to consider during their next rulemaking session for kiosks and self-service. You also have until November 20th to make add comments for Voting and Accessibility — here is the Google form
We held our quarterly call via Teams October 28th.
In attendance:
Access Board
The NFB
The Lighthouse for the BLind
American Council of the Blind
Open Doors
Goldstein & Levy
William Goren Associates
KioWare
KIOSK Information Systems
Pyramid Computer
Vispero
Kiosk Group
Tech For All
Storm Interface
Dynatouch
Dolphin Computer Access
NCR
Frank Mayer
We will issue a more formal response to action items and directions but to address some.
The Access Board mentioned another round of rulemaking regarding kiosks is on the table. We’ve noted the timeframe and announcement in our Kiosk ADA FAQ
Several in the audience were unaware that the KMA Code of Practice has been publicly available for download since Feb2021. It is in a redacted form without the legalese and in plain English. This is also listed in our Kiosk ADA FAQ
The call went over 90 minutes and was very instructive. The comments by the Access Board were very helpful as were inputs from the legal law establishment (Goldstein & Levy as well as Goren Associates).
Comments for Next Rulemaking Session
You are welcome to submit suggestions and comments for the U.S. Access Board to consider during their next rulemaking session for kiosks and self-service. You also have until November 20th to make add comments for Voting and Accessibility — here is the Google form
As language, perceptions and social mores change rapidly, it is becoming increasingly difficult for journalists and other communicators to figure out how to refer to people with disabilities. Even the term “disability” is not universally accepted. This style guide, which covers dozens of words and terms commonly used when referring to disability, can help. The guide was developed by the National Center on Disability and Journalism at Arizona State University’s Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication and was last updated in the summer of 2021.
First, we would like to offer some basic guidelines:
Refer to a disability only when it’s relevant to the story and, when possible, confirm the diagnosis with a reputable source, such as a medical professional or other licensed professional.
When possible, ask sources how they would like to be described. If the source is not available or unable to communicate, ask a trusted family member, advocate, medical professional or relevant organization that represents people with disabilities.
Avoid made-up words like “diversability” and “handicapable” unless using them in direct quotes or to refer to a movement or organization.
Be sensitive when using words like “disorder,” “impairment,” “abnormality” and “special” to describe the nature of a disability. The word “condition” is often a good substitute that avoids judgement. But note that there is no universal agreement on the use of these terms — not even close. “Disorder” is ubiquitous when it comes to medical references; and the same is true for “special” when used in “special education,” so there may be times when it’s appropriate to use them. But proceed with extra caution.
Similarly, there is not really a good way to describe the nature of a condition. As you’ll see below, “high functioning” and “low functioning” are considered offensive. “Severe” implies judgement; “significant” might be better. Again, proceed with caution. This is increasingly tricky turf.
Of course, our sources don’t always speak the way we write. That’s OK. You may end up using a derogatory term in a direct quote, but be certain that it’s fundamental to the story. Otherwise, paraphrase and use a more acceptable term.
In this guide, we urge reporters and other communications professionals to refer to a disability only when it’s relevant to the story being told. But what is “relevant” is not always clear. Should a story about residents complaining about noisy airplanes flying over their houses note that one of the residents who is complaining uses a wheelchair? Should someone who is blind be identified as such in a story about people who have been stranded while hiking and had to be rescued?
In the first case, we suggest the answer is “no.” The fact that someone uses a wheelchair does not make the airplane noise any more or less irritating. In the second case, the answer is “maybe.” If the hiker’s blindness contributed to him or her getting stranded, making note of that fact is relevant. If the person’s sight had nothing to do with the situation, leave it out.
People living with disabilities often complain, and rightly so, that their disability is mentioned even when the story has nothing to do with their disability.
A note about person-first language. In the past, we have encouraged journalists and others to use person-first language (such as, “a person who has Down syndrome” rather than “a Down syndrome person”) as a default. Even with the caveat that this does not apply to all, we have heard from many people with disabilities who take issue with that advice. For us, this really emphasizes the fact that no two people are the same — either with regard to disabilities or language preferences. And so we are no longer offering advice regarding a default. Instead, we hope you will double down to find out how people would like to be described. We also will include some guidance in individual entries here — but again, we encourage you to confirm on a case-by-case basis.
Another note — this time about the language around COVID-19. The pandemic altered the way many people think about disability, as people who had never encountered such obstacles were suddenly unable to leave their houses. People with disabilities spoke out on social media about this, and “long haulers” now understand firsthand what some people with disabilities experience. The language around COVID-19 is evolving. The BBC and The Conversation both have well-considered takes on it. Archaeologist Elisa Perego coined the term “long COVID” to refer to people with lasting symptoms. This condition also has been called “long haul” and people with it, “long haulers.”
Writing about disability is complicated and requires sensitivity — a must for any form of journalism that involves people. If you are in doubt about how to refer to a person, ask the person. And if you can’t ask the person, don’t avoid writing about disability. Use this guide. Do your best.
–Amy Silverman, NCDJ advisory board member
Special thanks to Rebecca Monteleone, University of Toledo; Jon Henner, University of North Carolina at Greensboro; Sherri Collins, Arizona Commission for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing; Sara Luterman; the NCDJ advisory board; and all the style guide readers who offered suggestions for this guide.
Plaintiff’s attorneys have increasingly sued companies alleging their websites fail to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), California Unruh Civil Rights Act, and similar state laws that prohibit discrimination against disabled individuals. The justification of these lawsuits is that companies with websites that do not allow those with disabilities to use and enjoy the website are engaging in unlawful discrimination. While the law remains unsettled in this area (e.g., there is disagreement over the “standard for accessibility” and which companies may be obligated to have accessible websites), judges are increasingly enforcing anti-discrimination laws against companies that do not have accessible websites. The cost of non-compliance can be staggering, costing companies exponentially more than had the company just made their website accessible.
Uncle Sam has now entered the fray, extending a helping hand to small businesses that wish to invest in updating or maintaining their websites to be more accessible to those with disabilities. In particular, the IRS is offering a one-time tax credit of up to $5,000 for small businesses that incur expenses associated with making their website more accessible. Website expenses incurred must be between $250 to $10,250, and only 50% of the costs are eligible for the credit (with a maximum credit of $5,000). In order to claim the credit, businesses need to use IRS Form 8826 (Disabled Access Credit) and file the form with their tax return. Only businesses with less than $1 million in gross revenue or fewer than 30 full-time employees in the prior tax year are eligible for the credit. Your accountant or tax preparer can assist you further to determine if your business qualifies for the credit.
The bottom line is that this relatively little-known tax break provides a win-win-win. It helps technology businesses more easily sell website accessibility solutions, helps their small business customers obtain the same services at what is essentially a significant discount (via a tax credit) while mitigating the risk of future litigation, and helps aid disabled individuals in better accessing the Internet.
Jon L. Farnsworth is a partner at Spencer Fane in the firm’s Minneapolis office. He can be reached at jfarnsworth@spencerfane.com.
A recent US Access Board panel discussion regarding self-service transaction machines featured various speakers from advocacy organizations and the self-service kiosk industry. Among the speakers was NCR’s Phil Day who discussed the evolution of the uNav/AudioNav device. This was a product developed in a close and productive collaboration between NCR and Storm Interface.
Referred to as uNav by the team at NCR, Storm agreed to further develop and market the product as AudioNav in reference to its core function of ‘system navigation by means of audio prompts’.
Since its launch in 2015, AudioNav has become an important part of Storm’s Assistive Technology Products range. Intuitive and easy to use and with several product formats now available, the simplicity of the AudioNav device appeals to both system designers and system users. Originally designed for use in travel kiosks and self-checkout lanes, it is now widely regarded as the ‘Gold Standard’ for accessible self-service kiosks in many public use applications.
Phil credited the team at Storm Interface for engineering an ADA compliant device that would withstand hard use and abuse in a wide range of unattended public environments. In 2019 Storm were proud to announce that the Storm AudioNav version (featuring a more widely compatible USB system interface) had been awarded the Royal National Institute of Blind People (RNIB) Tried and Tested accreditation. Since 2015, AudioNav keypads have evolved under a continuous development program to meet current mandates and emerging best practices.
Storm Interface are widely regarded as the industry leading designer and manufacturer of assistive technology products for the self-service sector. Designated as the Storm ATP range, these products have been successfully deployed in kiosks and interactive terminals across many market segments and global territories.
Background Information:
About Storm Interface
For more than 35 years Storm Interface have designed and manufactured secure, rugged and reliable keypads, keyboards and interface devices. Storm products are built to withstand rough use and abuse in unattended public-use and industrial applications. Storm Assistive Technology Products are recognized by the Royal National Institute for Blind People under their ‘RNIB Tried and Tested’ program. www.storm-interface.com
Feb 5, 2021 — Statement from Storm Interface following conference call with NFB on the use of personal phones as an accessible interface to Smart City terminals.
Statement for submission to the NFB, the Federal Access Board and Storm sales personnel.
Use of personal phones as an accessible interface
As a manufacturer of Accessible System Interface Devices, including Touchless Kiosk Interface Devices (TKI), Storm Interface are concerned that, following the NFB online conference (IKE Smart City Presentation), clarification is needed about the suitability of mobile phones as a primary (or sole) accessible interface to self-service and ICT systems.
Our concern centers around the needs of people with a diverse range of sensory, physical, dexterity, and cognitive impairments. Including, but certainly not limited to, those with sight impairments.
Use of a touchscreen smartphone as a primary system interface discriminates against the following groups: –
The significant socio-demographic group without the financial resources to purchase an internet-enabled mobile phone or pay for a service plan to support prolonged internet connectivity and/or application downloads.
Those visitors to the USA (and other travelers) without international phone service or a roaming capability across all 50 states.
Those with phones not capable of maintaining battery charge during prolonged periods of use.
And, most significantly, those with impaired dexterity including, but not limited to; palsy, neuropathy, tremor, missing or atrophied limbs or digits, muscular dystrophy, etc.
When proposing Storm’s Touchless Kiosk Interface (TKI) as an aid to accessibility it is our policy to promote TKI as part of a multi-technology accessible interface solution. It should only be promoted as an augmentation and supplement to tactilely discernible navigation and control of both audible content and visible content displayed on a screen. It cannot and should not be promoted or considered as a compliant accessible interface when used in isolation.
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2 covers a wide range of recommendations for making Web content more accessible. Following these guidelines will make content more accessible to a wider range of people with disabilities, including accommodations for blindness and low vision, deafness and hearing loss, limited movement, speech disabilities, photosensitivity, and combinations of these, and some accommodation for learning disabilities and cognitive limitations; but will not address every user need for people with these disabilities. These guidelines address accessibility of web content on desktops, laptops, tablets, and mobile devices. Following these guidelines will also often make Web content more usable to users in general.
WCAG 2.2 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. See Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) Overview for an introduction and links to WCAG technical and educational material.
WCAG 2.2 extends Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.1 [WCAG21], which was published as a W3C Recommendation June 2018. Content that conforms to WCAG 2.2 also conforms to WCAG 2.0 and WCAG 2.1. The WG intends that for policies requiring conformance to WCAG 2.0 or WCAG 2.1, WCAG 2.2 can provide an alternate means of conformance. The publication of WCAG 2.2 does not deprecate or supersede WCAG 2.0 or WCAG 2.1. While WCAG 2.0 and WCAG 2.1 remain W3C Recommendations, the W3C advises the use of WCAG 2.2 to maximize future applicability of accessibility efforts. The W3C also encourages use of the most current version of WCAG when developing or updating Web accessibility policies.
Status of This Document
This section describes the status of this document at the time of its publication. Other documents may supersede this document. A list of current W3C publications and the latest revision of this technical report can be found in the W3C technical reports index at https://www.w3.org/TR/.
This is a First Public Working Draft of Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2 by the Accessibility Guidelines Working Group. WCAG 2.2 continues the updates to Web Content Accessibility Guidelines from WCAG 2.1. This first draft includes 1 new Success Criterion, which is supported by Understanding and Techniques. Additional Success Criteria are being developed for future Working Drafts, all of which are expected to be in WCAG 2.2 by April 2020. Because of the rapid development, early review is critical.
To comment, file an issue in the W3C WCAG GitHub repository. The Working Group requests that public comments be filed as new issues, one issue per discrete comment. It is free to create a GitHub account to file issues. If filing issues in GitHub is not feasible, send email to public-agwg-comments@w3.org (comment archive). The Working Group request comments on this draft be filed by 23 March 2020. In-progress updates to the guidelines can be viewed in the public editors’ draft.
This document was published by the Accessibility Guidelines Working Group as a First Public Working Draft. This document is intended to become a W3C Recommendation.
Publication as a First Public Working Draft does not imply endorsement by the W3C Membership. This is a draft document and may be updated, replaced or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to cite this document as other than work in progress.
This document was produced by a group operating under the W3C Patent Policy. W3C maintains a public list of any patent disclosures made in connection with the deliverables of the group; that page also includes instructions for disclosing a patent. An individual who has actual knowledge of a patent which the individual believes contains Essential Claim(s) must disclose the information in accordance with section 6 of the W3C Patent Policy.
They open the world. They eliminate discrimination. They ensure people are defined by potential. They change lives.
The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is an idea that became reality, which is why it’s important each year to pause to recognize the importance of this landmark law and what it means to so many of our fellow New Jerseyans and people across our nation.
uly 26 will mark the 29th anniversary of the ADA. That’s 29 years of changing lives and perceptions, of equal access and of making clear that we as a society will always stand for the rights of our family members, friends, neighbors, and countless people we’ve never met to live fulfilling lives, no matter their personal situation.
The ADA allows individuals with disabilities to participate in the world around them, and has likely changed lives in ways many could not have imagined when it became law in 1990, but while we pause each July to remember the benefits of the ADA and its importance, we also must honor its ideals each and every day of the year.
Understanding people with disabilities starts with empathy
We must move to address the social stigma surrounding this community.
The ADA provides clear and comprehensive national standards to eliminate discrimination against individuals with disabilities. As a result, individuals with disabilities, as is their right, can live in their home and have equal access to education, jobs, recreation, shopping and entertainment. It has helped shape our nation, but the work is not done. We must remain steadfast to the principles, aiming for greater inclusivity, equality and fairness.
I have the honor of being the director of New Jersey Department of Human Services’ Division of Disability Services, which works to streamline access to services and information to promote and enhance independent living for individuals with all disabilities.
Our goal is to promote maximum independence and full participation of people with disabilities within all aspects of community life.
Through our toll free hotline, 1-888-285-3036, the division responds to requests for assistance. Certified Information and referral specialists are available to confidentially discuss issues, provide information, assist with problem solving and refer individuals to appropriate agencies or services.
We also publish New Jersey Resources, a comprehensive guide to services available throughout the state. I urge everyone to download a copy.
We also administer some great programs such as the Traumatic Brain Injury Fund, and the Personal Assistance Services Program, both of which offer vital assistance to help individuals with disabilities live as independently as possible within our communities. Additionally, we can help people to access NJ ABLE, which allows individuals with disabilities to save for expenses without losing eligibility for their Medicaid and other benefits. And we work with our partners at Human Services, including the Commission for the Blind and Visually Impaired, the Division of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing and Division of Developmental Disabilities, which serves individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities.
The ADA rightfully opened the world to individuals with disabilities. We must ensure that equal access remains a priority, while doing whatever we can to assist individuals with disabilities to live full and independent lives. We are here to help. Give us a call or visit us at nj.gov/humanservices/dds/services/ to learn more. Together, we can continue ensuring people are defined by their potential. We can change lives.
Peri Nearon is the director of the New Jersey Division of Disability Services with the Department of Human Services.
WCAG Overview 2.1: What is Next for Accessibility Guidelines
By Glenda Sims June 06, 2018
WCAG Overview – Are you staying on top of your digital accessibility game? Don’t be caught by surprise that a new version of W3C’s Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) is on the horizon. In fact, the next “minor” version of WCAG was formally published on June 5, 2018! The W3C has researched user needs and written WCAG 2.1 success criteria to fill known gaps. There is also a parallel effort in motion to create a major revision of digital accessibility guidelines. View non-AMP version at deque.com
History of WCAG
Before we look into the future, let’s understand the past. May 5, 1999 the first international standard for digital accessibility (WCAG 1.0) was published by the W3C. It was technology specific focusing on html. December 11, 2008, WCAG 2.0 more) have adopted WCAG 2.0 as their legal digital accessibility standard. By October 2012, the International Standards Organization (ISO) even established WCAG 2.0 as the digital standard for accessibility. ISO/IEC 40500:2012
” alt=”” aria-hidden=”true” /> Despite being almost a decade old, WCAG 2.0 continues to be a viable standard for digital accessibility. However, in internet years, 2008 is ancient. So, it should come as no surprise that known gaps exist in WCAG 2.0 and need to be filled. Parallel efforts are underway to address the evolving needs of digital accessibility. The first short-term effort is WCAG 2.1, which is a very focused release. The second longer-term effort has a code name of Silver. Silver is the reimagining of digital Accessibility Guidelines (AG) from the ground up.
Since it is likely that the future version of the Accessibility Guidelines will drop the “WC” for “web content” and simply be known as the “Accessibility Guidelines” (AG), it has been given the nickname of “Silver” because “Ag” is the symbol for the chemical element silver on the periodic table.
What is WCAG 2.1?
If you are already familiar with WCAG 2.0, you probably have a number of questions. And we’ve got answers!
Is WCAG 2.1 backward compatible with WCAG 2.0? Yes! WCAG 2.0 is still a valid and very useful standard. WCAG 2.1 works in concert with WCAG 2.0.
Does WCAG 2.1 continue to use the WCAG 2.0 the A, AA, and AAA conformance levels? Yes. WCAG 2.1 uses the same A/AA/AAA conformance levels
What are the main areas of focus for WCAG 2.1? The three biggest gaps in WCAG 2.0 are related to:
mobile technology – mobile phones were not very smart back in 2008, and this platform evolves rapidly. It is no surprise that there are accessibility needs related to mobile that must be addressed. The Mobile Accessibility Task Force (MATF)was created to address accessibility challenges for mobile.
For any technical standard to be successful it must be clear, distinct, testable, technically possible and reasonable. The new success criterion in WCAG 2.1 had to meet all of the following:
Testable – requirement must be reliably and consistently testable using an automated or manual process.
Condition – requirement must describe a condition to be met, not a method. Conditions are technology agnostic.
Applies to all content – requirement applies to all types of content by default. Any exceptions must be explicitly identified.
Applies across technologies – requirement applies across all types of digital technology formats including web, mobile, desktop, digital documents, email, software applications and more.
Implementable – requirement must be possible to implement today. Sufficient techniques must be documented using readily available formats, user agents, and assistive technologies.
What was the timeline for publishing WCAG 2.1?
Creating an international technical standard is not something you do overnight. But with the rate that technology changes, taking too long to update a standard can be a problem too. It has been over 9 years since WCAG 2.0 was released in December of 2008. Recognizing this, the W3C adopted an incremental approach to developing WCAG 2.1 in 18 months. WCAG 2.1 timeline:
August 22, 2017 – stop accepting new SC proposals (Done!)
September 2017 – 6th Public Working Draft (Done!)
December 2017 – 7th Public Working Draft (Done!)
January 2018 – Candidate Recommendation (Done!)
April 2018 – Proposed Recommendation (Done!)
June 5, 2018 – WCAG 2.1 Recommendation (Done!)
Who created WCAG 2.1?
Everything related to the development of WCAG 2.1 was done where the public could see and comment. Over 150 people from all over the world were involved in creating this next version of WCAG. Check out the current list of W3C Accessibility Guidelines Working Group participants. If you aren’t already involved, there are lots of ways to jump in and contribute.
Could I Watch WCAG 2.1 Evolve Online?
Even cooler, the drafting of WCAG 2.1 occurred on GitHub. So you could see how each proposed WCAG 2.1 Success Criteria was created and read questions and conversations that lead to refinements. For example, here are 24 issues in the WCAG 2.1 GitHub repository that helped form the WCAG 2.1 August 2017 Working Draft.
Talk about open and inclusive! Anyone in the world could watch WCAG 2.1 evolving. You could jump in and make comments, volunteer and help create a better web for all.
Where is the Final version of WCAG 2.1?
The final version of WCAG 2.1 can always be found at this URL: https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/ The <h2> list the date of publication. Links let you navigate to all previously published versions. The June 5, 2018, version, known as official W3C Recommendation is the final version.
What in the world is a W3C Recommendation? How is it different than a Working Draft, Candidate Recommendation or Proposed Recommendation?
A W3C Recommendation is the official final publication for a technical standard that has reached full maturity and is ready to be used. There are many review steps and refinements required before the W3C determines a standard is ready to be published.
” alt=”” aria-hidden=”true” />
The W3C has a well-defined process for publishing quality technical standards that can stand the test of time. Here are the basic steps:
First Public Working Draft (FPWD) published
MUST encourage early and wide review.
Revised Public Working Draft(s) (WD) publish zero or more
MAY publish additional drafts based on input.
Candidate Recommendation (CR) formerly known as Last Call Working Draft
MUST specify deadline for additional comments.
The technical standard is believed to be stable and appropriate for implementation.
The standard MAY still be modified based on implementation experience/feedback. Modification SHOULD be minimal
Proposed Recommendation (PR) call for review
A formal request for approval of the technical standard by the W3C Advisory Committee.
MUST show that the proposed technical standards have received wide review
MUST show that all issues raised during the Candidate Recommendation have been formally addressed
W3C Recommendation (REC) published
The decision to advance a document to Recommendation is a W3C decision.
The standard has reached full maturity. It is a formal Recommendation from the W3C.
Getting to Know the WCAG 2.1 Proposed Recommendation
On June 5, 2018, the W3C published the WCAG 2.1 Recommendation. Here is a summary of the new success criteria:
New Success Criteria in the WCAG 2.1 Proposed Recommendation
Adhoc
Cognitive
Low Vision
Mobile
Total
Level A
0
0
0
5
5
Level AA
0
1
4
2
7
Level AAA
1
2
0
2
5
Total
1
3
4
9
17
WCAG Overview – Remember, WCAG 2.1 includes all of WCAG 2.0, and adds 17 new requirements. Everything you already know and do to meet WCAG 2.0 is still valid and necessary. WCAG 2.1 adds 17 new success criteria to fill in known gaps, especially in the areas of mobile, cognitive and low vision.
How Do You Feel About WCAG 2.1 Right Now?
” alt=”” aria-hidden=”true” />
Before we go any further, I want to ask you, “How are you feeling?” Are you anxious, worried, stressed? Or are you as excited as a kid on Christmas Eve? Either way, I want you to stop and take a deep breath. Remember, none of these WCAG 2.1 success criteria are required by law today (June 2018). They are all really good things to do for digital accessibility, but your list of things you must do today is not about to get longer based on this.
The 17 WCAG 2.1 Success Criteria
” alt=”” aria-hidden=”true” />
Let’s take a closer look at WCAG 2.1 A and AA Success Criteria based on the W3C Recommendation 5 June 2018. For each I’ve added a persona quote to help you understand the accessibility need. The persona quotes are from my imagination.
WCAG Overview
Orientation (AA)
Persona Quote: “Landscape or Portrait? Don’t make me turn my device 90 degrees.”
Origin: Mobile
Why: (Perceivable) Some users have their device mounted in a fixed orientation (e.g. on arm of power wheelchair). Therefore, digital applications need to support both orientations by making sure content and functionality are available in both landscape and portrait.
Requirement:
“Content does not restrict its view and operation to a single display orientation, such as portrait or landscape, unless a specific display orientation is essential.”
Identify Input Purpose (AA)
Persona Quote: What is this input field for?”
Origin: Cognitive
Why: (Perceivable) To help people with cognitive disabilities understand and use form inputs. Personalization based on metadata will allow the use of familiar terms and symbols for input labels. Having familiar terms and symbols is key to being able to use the web. However, what is familiar for one person may be new or confusing for another requiring them to learn new symbols. Future personalization tools could include the ability for a user to load a set of symbols that is appropriate for them, ensuring that all users find input fields simple and familiar.
Requirement:
“The purpose of each input field collecting information about the user can be programmatically determined when:
The content is implemented using technologies with support for identifying the expected meaning for form input data.”
Reflow (AA)
Persona Quote: “Horizontal scrolling is evil!”
Origin: Low Vision
Why:(Perceivable) A significant proportion of people with low vision need more than a 200% increase in the size of content. The impact of horizontal scrolling can increase the effort required to read by 40-100 times. Avoid designs that require horizontal scrolling.
Requirement:
“Content can be presented without loss of information or functionality, and without requiring scrolling in two dimensions for:
Vertical scrolling content at a width equivalent to 320 CSS pixels
Horizontal scrolling content at a height equivalent to 256
Except for parts of the content which require two-dimensional layout for usage or meaning.”
Non-Text Contrast (AA)
Persona Quote: “Did you want me to see that important image/user interface control, or not?”
Origin: Low Vision
Why:(Perceivable) To extend the color contrast requirements for text (in WCAG 2.0 SC 1.4.3) to include important graphics.
Requirement:
“The visual presentation of the following have a contrast ratio of at least 3:1 against adjacent color(s):
User Interface Components: Visual information required to identify user interface components and states, except for inactive components or where the appearance of the component is determined by the user agent and not modified by the author;
Graphical Objects: Parts of graphics required to understand the content, except when a particular presentation of graphics is essential to the information being conveyed.”
Text Spacing (AA)
Persona Quote: “Curse Word! This text is so hard to read! I need to change the spacing to read it.”
Origin: Low Vision
Why:(Perceivable) Ensure that people with low vision can override paragraph spacing, letter spacing, word spacing and line height.
Requirement:
“In content implemented using markup languages that support the following textstyle properties, no loss of content or functionality occurs by setting all of the following and by changing no other style property:
Line height (line spacing) to at least 1.5 times the font size;
Spacing following paragraphs to at least 2 times the font size;
Letter spacing (tracking) to at least 0.12 times the font size;
Word spacing to at least 0.16 times the font size.
Exception: Human languages and scripts that do not make use of one or more of these text style properties in written text can conform using only the properties that exist for that combination of language and script.
Content on Hover or Focus (AA)
Persona Quote: “Get out of the way! I can’t see or use the content/control I need!”
Origin: Low Vision
Why: (Perceivable) New content that appears only on focus or mouseover can present many challenges for users with low vision and others whose mouse accuracy may be low.
Requirement:
“Where receiving and then removing pointer hover or keyboard focus triggers additional content to become visible and then hidden, the following are true:
Dismissable:< A mechanism is available to dismiss the additional content without moving pointer hover or keyboard focus, unless the additional content communicates an input error or does not obscure or replace other content;
Hoverable: If pointer hover can trigger the additional content, then the pointer can be moved over the additional content without the additional content disappearing;
Persistent: The additional content remains visible until the hover or focus trigger is removed, the user dismisses it, or its information is no longer valid.
Exception: The visual presentation of the additional content is controlled by the user agent and is not modified by the author.”
Character Key Shortcuts (A)
Persona Quote: “Alexa! Stop! I did not mean for you to…!”
Origin: Mobile
Why: (Operable) Help users who rely on speech-to-text technologies to interact with content without inadvertently triggering some functionality based on a shortcut.
Requirement:
“If a keyboard shortcut is implemented in content using only letter (including upper- and lower-case letters), punctuation, number, or symbol characters, then at least one of the following is true:
Turn off: A mechanism is available to turn the shortcut off;
Remap: A mechanism is available to remap the shortcut to use one or more non-printable keyboard characters (e.g. Ctrl, Alt, etc.);
Active only on focus: The keyboard shortcut for a user interface component is only active when that component has focus.”
Pointer Gestures (A)
Persona Quote: “You expect me to do that complex hand gesture? Are you kidding me? What is this? The finger Olympics???”
Origin: Mobile
Why: (Operable) Help users who cannot accurately perform complex pointer gestures. Touchscreen swipes or multi-pointer gestures such as a two-finger pinch/zoom may be impossible for some users.
Requirement:
“All functionality that uses multipoint or path-based gestures for operation can be operated with a single pointer without a path-based gesture, unless a multipoint or path-based gesture is essential.”
Pointer Cancellation (A)
Persona Quote: “Oh Noooooo! I just accidentally activated X just by touching it!”
Origin: Mobile
Why: (Operable) People with various disabilities can inadvertently initiate touch or mouse events with unwanted results. Help reduce the chance that a control will be accidentally activated.
No Down-Event: The down-event of the pointer is not used to execute any part of the function;
Abort or Undo: Completion of the function is on the up-event, and a mechanism is available to abort the function before completion or to undo the function after completion;
Up Reversal: The up-event reverses any outcome of the preceding down-event;
Essential: Completing the function on the down-event is essential.
Label in Name (A)
Persona Quote: “Computer! ‘Submit’ the form! Computer! Curses! Why aren’t you doing what I said?!?!”
Origin: Mobile
Why: (Operable) Help users who rely on speech-to-text technologies to interact with content based on an intuitive visual label.
Why: (Operable) Users with disabilities may be unable to perform particular actions dependent on sensors (like tilting or shaking) because the device may be mounted or users may be physically unable to perform the necessary action.
Requirement:
“Functionality that can be operated by device motion or user motion can also be operated by user interface components and responding to the motion can be disabled to prevent accidental actuation, except when:
Supported Interface: The motion is used to operate functionality through an accessibility supportedinterface;
Essential: The motion is essential for the function and doing so would invalidate the activity.”
Status Messages (AA)
Persona Quote: “I can’t tell if anything has happened.”
Origin: Cognitive
Why: (Robust) Some error or success messages are so subtly added to a page, it is hard to notice them. Users who are blind, low vision or have cognitive disabilities may have trouble finding a status message that has been added to the page.
Last, but not least, there are 5 more WCAG 2.1 Success Criteria that fall under AAA. If you are an accessibility expert, you should review and encourage the use of these AAA requirements as well.
I predict that most US organizations (including businesses and governments) will not require WCAG 2.1 compliance for years. The EU is likely to make WCAG 2.1 a requirement as early as 2019. Smart developers, designers, and accessibility experts are already considering WCAG 2.1 as documented best practices that can be implemented today. Want to future-proof your web? Start using the principles of WCAG 2.1 today!
How Will You Get Involved?
Now is the time for you to spend some time thinking about how WCAG 2.1 will impact you. Ask questions. Volunteer to help write Understanding Documents, Sufficient Techniques and more.
Is this work easy? Nope. Is it deeply meaningful and important? Absolutely! This is my first time to work on WCAG. And I gotta tell y’all…this…..THIS…. is the most intellectually stimulating work I’ve ever done. There are times over the past year where I thought my brain was going to melt. But, I figured it was my turn to make a positive impact. Great people went before me and dared to create the first screen reader and the first and second versions of WCAG. Time for me to step up to the plate and help create the solutions that are needed today (while benefiting from the brilliant work done before).
(Goodwitch holds out her hand to you.) Come on and join us. I promise you will be grateful you did. How are you going to be part of the solution?
Every day, websites and mobile apps prevent people from using them. Ignoring accessibility is no longer a viable option.
How do you prevent your company from being a target for a website accessibility ADA lawsuit?
Guidelines for websites wanting to be accessible to people with disabilities have existed for nearly two decades thanks to the W3C Web Accessibility Initiative.
A close cousin to usability and user experience design, accessibility improves the overall ease of use for webpages and mobile applications by removing barriers and enabling more people to successfully complete tasks.
We know now that disabilities are only one area that accessibility addresses.
Most companies do not understand how people use their website or mobile app, or how they use their mobile or assistive tech devices to complete tasks.
Even riskier is not knowing about updates in accessibility guidelines and new accessibility laws around the world.
Investing in Website Accessibility Is a Wise Marketing Decision
Internet marketers found themselves taking accessibility seriously when their data indicated poor conversions. They discovered that basic accessibility practices implemented directly into content enhanced organic SEO.
Many marketing agencies include website usability and accessibility reviews as part of their online marketing strategy for clients because a working website performs better and generates more revenue.
Adding an accessibility review to marketing service offerings is a step towards avoiding an ADA lawsuit, which of course, is a financial setback that can destroy web traffic and brand loyalty.
Convincing website owners and companies of the business case for accessibility is difficult. One reason is the cost. Will they see a return on their investment?
I would rather choose to design an accessible website over paying for defense lawyers and losing revenue during remediation work.
Another concern is the lack of skilled developers trained in accessibility. Do they hire someone or train their staff?
Regardless of whether an accessibility specialist is hired or in-house developers are trained in accessibility, the education never ends.
Specialists are always looking for solutions and researching options that meet guidelines. In other words, training never ends.
Many companies lack an understanding of what accessibility is and why it is important. They may not know how or where to find help.
Accessibility advocates are everywhere writing articles, presenting webinars, participating in podcasts, and writing newsletters packed with tips and advice.
ADA lawsuits make the news nearly every day in the U.S. because there are no enforceable regulations for website accessibility. This is not the case for government websites.
Federal websites must adhere to Section 508 by law. State and local websites in the U.S. are required to check with their own state to see what standards are required.
Most will simply follow Section 508 or WCAG2.1 AAA guidelines.
If your website targets customers from around the world, you may need to know the accessibility laws in other countries. The UK and Canada, for example, are starting to enforce accessibility.
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2 covers a wide range of recommendations for making Web content more accessible. Following these guidelines will make content more accessible to a wider range of people with disabilities, including accommodations for blindness and low vision, deafness and hearing loss, limited movement, speech disabilities, photosensitivity, and combinations of these, and some accommodation for learning disabilities and cognitive limitations; but will not address every user need for people with these disabilities. These guidelines address accessibility of web content on desktops, laptops, tablets, and mobile devices. Following these guidelines will also often make Web content more usable to users in general.
Ideas are powerful things.
Despite being almost a decade old, WCAG 2.0 continues to be a viable standard for digital accessibility. However, in internet years, 2008 is ancient. So, it should come as no surprise that known gaps exist in WCAG 2.0 and need to be filled. Parallel efforts are underway to address the evolving needs of digital accessibility. The first short-term effort is WCAG 2.1, which is a very focused release. The second longer-term effort has a code name of Silver. Silver is the reimagining of digital Accessibility Guidelines (AG) from the ground up.
