– DRAFT –
Guidance for Policy Makers Subgroup

<shadi> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2023AprJun/0185.html

<shadi> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1B-qfTrPxnhIa0AxhPEF6SIDTLAGnneoauBRHGzS5q7U/edit#heading=h.s0ukjtq0hqao

<shadi> https://w3c.github.io/silver/use-cases/

<mgifford> Practically, Sa11y is a nice way to provide this type of support to authors https://sa11y.netlify.app/

shadi: We worked on situation 1 and brainstormed what can be done in each situation. There could be a technical component. There could also be a policy component.

shadi: I would like to go through as many of these situations as we can over the coming weeks. An interesting idea last time reminded the protocols discussion as a way to address certain requirements. An organisation can put in additional requirements

shadi: We are not seeking to find consensus but to come up with ideas.

Looking over the situations we are trying tackle I wonder if trying to define a framework of the parties and their responsibilities might give tools to solve the problems. If we can define the various parties e.g. the CMS provider and define responsibility and explain concepts from ATAG

wendyreid: Looking over the situations we are trying tackle I wonder if trying to define a framework of the parties and their responsibilities might give tools to solve the problems. If we can define the various parties e.g. the CMS provider and define responsibility and explain concepts from ATAG

<mgifford> I had discussions about this with BigCommerce vs Shopify last year. Some vendors clearly have invested more in accessibility

shadi: There is a lot of roles defined but not for service provider. As you say the web today is very different and we have these chains with multiple roles. Do we need to discuss this now? I think we should go through by situation and we may identify things specific to each situation. I think we will find these patterns.

mgifford: I have started to go through the situations. I think having practical examples would be helpful.

<shadi> https://w3c.github.io/silver/use-cases/

shadi: Each situation links to at least one example in the use cases.

Situation 2

<shadi> https://w3c.github.io/silver/use-cases/#situation-2

<mgifford> Done

<wendyreid> done]

<garcialo> done

wendyreid: Both examples have ways to handle so may just need clarifying. Maybe add provision for the platform.

mgifford: We need to name who has responsibility. Some things could be done through AI or simple analytics.

shadi: There are some differences dependent upon the law but we aren't getting into writing policies.

garcialo: What tools do policy writers have?

<mgifford> For user generated content, it is possible to restrict the functions that exist.

shadi: Responsibility doesn't end at defining tools. If there are repeating patterns you have an ongoing responsibility to to monitor these trends and continuously improve the tools you have.

wendyreid: Who the policy maker is is a complex thing. Mechanisms such as levels of responsibility for size of company and regular review are useful.

mgifford: We can provide suggestions for policy. The policy makers will make their own decisions but we can provide guidance

shadi: For now let's think about what we can do about each situation broadly.

<shadi> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/task-forces/silver/wiki/Substantial_Conformance/Example_Scenarios#Situation_2:_When_large_volumes_of_content_are_accumulating_too_rapidly_to_make_fully_conforming

<mgifford> For user generated content: 1) restrict what users can add (text is hard to screw up too badly). 2) ensure there is inline help text for whatever rich functionality is offered.

Cyborg: My concern about use case 2 is around the assumptions. The risks are large if suggesting the material accumulates too quickly. I don't think adding exemption is appropriate.

<mgifford> 3) provide users with feedback if accessibility best practices aren't being implemented. 4) aggregate information so that trends per user can be identified. 5) find ways to gamify results such that users interests align with larger goals of the site.

shadi: The idea is not blanket exemption. The risk analysis is important.

<Cyborg> if content accumulating "too rapidly", then an org needs to hire enough people to keep up with the flow

shadi: Like the suggestion to include the risk factor

Cyborg: Why should we care? If its accumulating to fast, it needs to be dealt with. It's not the responsibility to lower the standards

mgifford: We have to give a direction of progress

garcialo: we are talking about what could be done rather than lower the standards

wendyreid: we have two examples of companies doing good things - both unusual for the market today. It may help to have a third use case where an app has gained traction in a very short period of time.

shadi: Acquired content and a huge backlog is covered in situation 3

Cyborg: appreciate bringing in use cases and some will be covered in other use cases. We need to be mindful to not neglect the monopolies as we consider the start ups.

wendyreid: Responsibility should scale appropriately

<Cyborg> +1 to considering higher traffic zones, responsibilities of larger orgs, and risks related to access to services

garcialo: Considering the scale, accessibility of content could be prioritised.

<mgifford> 6) include an accessibility statement to allow PwD to report and prioritize priority pages.

<Cyborg> +1 to what Mike is sharing from Lucy Greco

mgifford: Example previously given of providing captioning for everything vs take everything down. The outcome was everything was taken down making the content inaccessible for everybody

Azlan_: Similar situation, an archive of legal documents, the archive was huge, being able to make them accessible, some were hand written or photographed
… there was discussion about situations like this, something could happen on demand
… then you know how to prioritizes
… know the needs of the end users

garcialo: had this exact same situation

wendyreid: Similar in publishing

garcialo: With this reactive to what is popular. You can monitor what influencers are recommending so can predict

shadi: The organisation could state how they will prioritise?

<mgifford> That's a great idea Shadi! Declaring what process an organization has is important

Cyborg: We need to encourage anticipating and preventative strategy

Next Meeting

NO MEETING NEXT WEEK MONDAY 5TH

<mgifford> Reduce, reuse, recycle. People forgot the 1st two & jumped to the last one. Similar issues apply to prioritization with WCAG. How do we emphasize the priority.

Homework to review the use cases and add thoughts and comments

<shadi> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1B-qfTrPxnhIa0AxhPEF6SIDTLAGnneoauBRHGzS5q7U/edit#

<shadi> rragent, make logs public