Raising awareness about disability in the UK
Our infographic, Understanding disability in the UK...
Our infographic, Understanding disability in the UK...
Firstly, here’s the story so far: The very first version of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) was published in 1999. It was a game changer. Suddenly, there was a set of specific standards that helped to make the web more accessible, and when WCAG v2.0 was released, they quickly became the gold standard for accessibility. WCAG 2.1 continues this legacy and is still considered the gold standard. Don’t get us wrong, there are many challenges with interpreting and using these guidelines, but even today, in conjunction with inclusive design and testing, they are an essential tool in making more accessible digital products.
A lot has changed since they were first released, and the guidelines are now on their third version (WCAG 2.1), with two other versions (WCAG 2.2 and WCAG 3.0 – Silver) currently in development. On 13 May 2020, the latest working draft of version 2.2 of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) was published for feedback. This working draft has one change to an existing success criterion and nine new success criteria that are still in active development (so they may or may not make it to the final recommendation as they are). This version still follows the structure of WCAG 2.1, and includes the same conformance levels (A, AA and AAA).
So, here is our simplified interpretation of the new proposed WCAG 2.2 success criteria, grouped by their conformance levels.
This is most applicable to ‘electronic publications’ (ePUB) and other similar formats (like PDF documents). It involves ensuring that page break locators and page numbers remain within the same relative location in the content even after assistive technology users make adjustments to the way the pages are displayed. This makes it possible for all users, irrespective of how they view/interact with the content, to find a particular page and have the same start and end content as everyone else.
Access to help is important for all users, and so this aims to make it easier to navigate to help features (e.g. contact information or FAQs) by placing these features in the same relative place across the website. For example, if a link to contact information is in the header of a web page, then it must be placed consistently in the header of all pages within the website.
Text entry is generally tedious for all, but for some users it is downright difficult. This aims to minimise having to re-enter data that was previously provided within the same process or in the same session by auto-populating or providing an option to select. For example, enabling the user to confirm that the billing address and delivery address are the same (rather than asking them to type each one out). This is particularly useful for users with cognitive issues and those with upper limb mobility impairments.
This requires that dragging movements are not the only way certain actions can be achieved. It aims to ensure that people with motor impairments who find drag and drop type precise movements tricky, can use all functionality by providing an alternative. For example, in addition to being able to pinch and pull to zoom in/out of a map, provide separate buttons to zoom in and out.
(Note: using larger sizes will help many people use targets more easily. Meeting 2.5.5 Target Size (Enhanced) is recommended whenever possible).
In most situations, no one wants to spend time looking for controls. This success criterion requires that all active controls be persistently visible (and does not require pointer hover or keyboard focus to make them visible). This is particularly useful for people with impaired memory or certain other cognitive and learning disabilities, as it ensures that they can easily find the right controls.
This is the only AAA level criterion and adds on to the previous success criterion (WCAG 2.4.11) by requiring a higher level of visibility for the focus indicator.
It achieves this by increasing the size and contrast ratio of the indicator and requiring that no part of the indicator be hidden. As before, it is relevant to sighted keyboard-only and keyboard-like device (e.g., a switch or voice input) users.
This is an existing success criterion that was first introduced in WCAG 2.0, and so is well-established. It requires that the keyboard focus indicator be visible, which makes it possible for users to know which element has keyboard focus (and so, what they are interacting with). In WCAG 2.2, it is proposed to upgrade this criterion from conformance level AA to A.
We are very pleased to see that the new success criteria consider a wider range of needs, for example, those with cognitive and upper limb mobility impairments as well as those who use alternative input devices. So, we are delighted with the new success criteria, though we feel that some of them need a bit more clarification before they can be practically applied. We have no doubt that they will ultimately make the guidelines more encompassing and helpful in making digital content more accessible to a wider audience.
That’s it for now! We will be closely monitoring and contributing our feedback as these guidelines evolve and will keep you updated.
Our infographic, Understanding disability in the UK...
Our infographic, Understanding disability in the UK...
Understand why making reasonable adjustments is significant for service providers and individuals...
Understand why making reasonable adjustments is significant for service providers and individuals...
Our perspective on WCAG 2.1, and why we think 5 of its 17 proposed new guidelines are particularly significant...
Our perspective on WCAG 2.1, and why we think 5 of its 17 proposed new guidelines are particularly significant...