DRAFT-

ATAG 2.0 CR Publish Planning

Note: This Web page is an internal working draft and should not be referenced or quoted under any circumstances.

This page: Status | Exit Criteria | At Risk | Announcements |

W3C Public Draft of Implementing ATAG 2.0

Status and Advancement

This is a Candidate Recommendation of Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines (ATAG) 2.0 from the Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines Working Group. This version integrates minor editorial changes identified since the publication of the 10 September 2013 Last Call Working Draft. The Working Group received 1 comment on this draft which AUWG addressed by a change to Implementing ATAG 2.0. For complete detail of the changes, see the automated difference document of ATAG 2.0 with all changes marked from the Last Call Working Draft.

A Candidate Recommendation is a document that has been widely reviewed and is ready for implementation. Publication as a Candidate Recommendation does not imply endorsement by the W3C Membership. Before the specification can progress to Proposed Recommendation, the CR exit criteria must be met. A test suite and an implementation report will be made during the Candidate Recommendation period.

Besides these implementations, feedback on implementation and use of this specification is welcome, including from implementations not selected as part of the formal implementation report for exiting Candidate Recommendation.

Working closely with authoring tool developers, we expect to receive initial implementations by @@ date @@ and to show evidence of meeting the exit criteria by @@ date @@

Candidate Recommendation Exit Criteria

The Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines Working Group intends to submit this document for consideration as a W3C Proposed Recommendation as soon as the following conditions are met.

1. [Tool by tool] Two independent [1] authoring tools must conform to ATAG 2.0 level AA (which includes level A).
2. [Tool by category] At least one authoring tool from each of the following authoring tool categories must conform to ATAG 2.0 Level A (i.e., will conform to all applicable Level A success criteria.):
   • WYSIWYG web page editing tools
   • Content management tools
   • Development tool for applet, scripts, or applications
   • Non-text media (e.g., video, audio, images) editing tools
   • Social media content authoring tools (e.g., blogs, wikis, social networks)
3. [Success criterion by success criterion] Each ATAG 2.0 success criterion must be implemented [2] by two independent authoring tools. For the thirteen ATAG 2.0 success criteria that are dependent on WCAG 2.0 [3] for their levels, each ATAG 2.0 success criterion must be implemented for two WCAG 2.0 success criteria at each level: A, AA and AAA. These six WCAG 2.0 success criteria are a sampling of the requirements of WCAG (e.g. text alternatives for non-text content, keyboard accessibility, sufficient contrast).

Note 1: "Independent authoring tools" are tools by different developers that do not share (or derive from) the same source code for the relevant feature(s). Sections of code that have no bearing on the implementation of this specification are exempt from this requirement. The authoring tools must be a shipping product or other publicly available version. Experimental implementations specifically designed to pass the test suite and not intended for normal usage, are not permitted.

Note 2: "Implemented" refers to situations in which a success criterion is applicable to a given authoring tool and the authoring tool meets the success criterion. This is in contrast to situations in which a success criterion is not applicable.

Note 3: For example, if the WCAG success criteria at level A are satisfied, then the ATAG success criteria is satisfied at level A. If the WCAG success criteria at level AA are satisfied, then the ATAG success criteria is satisfied at level AA. If the WCAG success criteria at level AAA are satisfied, then the ATAG success criteria is satisfied at level AAA.

Items At Risk

As a part of the Candidate Recommendation process, any items that might change or where there may not be implementations are marked as "at risk." "At risk" in no way implies that these success criteria are less important to accessibility. It is a W3C requirement to identify any provision for which the Working Group believes it may not be able to document the required implementations by the end of the Candidate Recommendation period.

Items At Risk for Change

If at least two implementations of each of the following success criteria do not exist at the end of the Candidate Recommendation period, the success criteria may be modified as stated:

• A.3.6.3 Apply Platform Settings: The authoring tool respects changes in platform high contrast settings, unless authors select more specific display and control settings using the authoring tool. (Level AA).
  This changes "platform display and control settings" to "platform high contrast settings".
• A.1.1.1 Web-Based Accessible (WCAG): If the authoring tool contains web-based user interfaces, then those web-based user interfaces meet the WCAG 2.0 success criteria. (Level A to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A success criteria; Level AA to meet WCAG 2.0 Level A and AA success criteria).
  This change removes the WCAG AAA level.

Items At Risk for Removal

If at least two implementations of each of the following success criteria do not exist at the end of the Candidate Recommendation period, the success criteria may be removed.

• B.2.4.4 Identify Template Accessibility (Enhanced): If the authoring tool provides templates, then all of the templates are accessible template (to WCAG Level AA). (Level AAA)
  

Announcements

Samples of previous CR announcements:

WCAG CR - WAI

Role Attribute CR - W3C