A11yTC MeetUp: Role-based Analysis of WCAG 2.2
Download as PPTX, PDF0 likes86 views
The document presents a presentation by Bill Tyler on role-based analysis of WCAG 2.2 at the A11y Twin Cities meetup, discussing responsibilities across different roles in the software development lifecycle concerning web accessibility. It highlights the shift in ownership of accessibility from developers to UX and visual designers and outlines new success criteria in WCAG 2.2. The talk emphasizes the need to integrate accessibility early in the design process rather than relying solely on testing at the end.
A11yTC MeetUp: Role-based Analysis of WCAG 2.2
- 1. A11y Twin Cities Meetup, July 25, 2022 Bill Tyler Slides: http://bit.ly.com/xxxxxx (TBD) Role-based analysis of WCAG 2.2
- 2. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 2 Introductions and agenda Bill Tyler Principal Digital Accessibility Engineer Optum Twitter: @billtyler e-mail: btyler@optum.com Topic Duration Welcome and introduction <2 minutes Role-based analysis background 10 minutes Who? Success criteria ownership roles 5 minutes When? Software design lifecycle entry points 5 minutes What? Underlying knowledge required 5 minutes Shifting left with role-based analysis 5 minutes Meet the 10 new WCAG 2.2 criteria 15 minutes Reviewing trends and conclusions 5 minutes Beyond WCAG 2.2: WCAG 3.0 and the future 5 minutes Q & A Until… ??
- 3. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 3 WCAG 2.2 still not official Analysis presented based upon latest editor’s drafts.
- 4. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 4 Role-based analysis background
- 5. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 5 Role-based analysis history 2017 to now My previous CSUN role-based presentations • 2017 WCAG 2.0 • 2019 WCAG 2.1 • 2022 WCAG 2.2 (working draft) My previous A11y Twin Cities role-based presentations • 2018 WCAG 2.1 • 2021 WCAG 2.2 (working draft) W3C EOWG Accessibility Roles & Responsibilities Mapping (ARRM) • 2020 CSUN, AccessU • 2021 axe-con, AccessU • 2022 A11y Talks ARRM resource links coming later in this presentation.
- 6. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 6 Typical development lifecycle (by role) QA / A11y testers Developers Content author Visual designer UX designer Business owner Add a11y Here
- 7. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 7 There’s something very wrong with this QA / A11y testers Developers Content author Visual designer UX designer Business owner Add A11y Here
- 8. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 8 The assumption
- 9. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 9 The assumption is… Developers are the owners Code is entry point Accessibility is magical guild secrets
- 10. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 10 Question the assumption Who? If not developers? When? If not code? What? If not accessibility?
- 11. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 11 Finding the answers Who? Which roles? When? Which deliverables? What? Which knowledge?
- 12. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 12 Who? Roles that own accessibility
- 13. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 13 Who owns accessibility? Identify the roles making the decisions that affect accessibility Business owner • Standard agile role • Focused on business outcomes • Project initiator • Requirement definer • Result approver UX designer • Business liaison • Requirement author • Wireframe creator • UX/usability expert • User research Visual designer • Presentation owner • Style expert • Layout creator • Design enforcer • Style guide author • Design comp artist • Image file producer Content author • Author of all text “large (section) and small (words)” • Content proofreader • Time-based media creator • Script writer • Audio and video file producer Developer • Front-end developer • Last stop before testing • Recipient of all defects
- 14. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 14 What about QA and a11y? Too little, too late • Testing is not design • Testing is at end • Design is (much) earlier • We must shift left QA / A11y testers Developers Content author Visual designer UX designer Business owner
- 15. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 15 Who: To what level is a role involved? Primary The owner ultimately responsible for the decision Always (and only) one Secondary Actively works with primary owner to make the decision Zero or more Contributor Provides input, but not involved in making decision Zero or more
- 16. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 16 Is it the developers?
- 17. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 17 No, it’s not likely to be the developers WCAG 2.2 success criteria (Level A and AA) primary ownership New WCAG 2.2 success criteria Primary owner Increase UX designer +5 Visual designer +3 Content author 0 Developer 0 Business owner 0 All WCAG 2.2 success criteria Primary owner % # UX designer 47% 27 Visual designer 21% 12 Content author 17% 10 Developer 14% 8 Business owner 2% 1 UX designer Visual designer Content author UX designer Visual designer Business owner Developer
- 18. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 18 Trending away from developers WCAG success criteria primary ownership (version 2.0 through 2.2) +100% Visual designer (since 2.0) UX designer +93% Developer unchanged WCAG Version 2.0 2.1 2.2 UX Designer 14 22 27 Visual Designer 6 9 12 Content Author 9 10 10 Developer 8 8 8 Business Owner 1 1 1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 1.0 2.0 3.0 Content author UX designer Visual designer Business owner Developer
- 19. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 19 When? Deliverables that impact accessibility
- 20. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 20 When is accessibility impacted in the project lifecycle? Identify deliverables that define the decisions. Which is first? User stories and requirements Core specifications and functionality Wireframes Structure of page, interface, interactions Style guides Site presentation, branding, colors, logos, layout Design comps Page or feature final presentation Content Text, terminology, including video and audio Code Front-end development: HTML, CSS, JavaScript
- 21. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 21 Is it code?
- 22. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 22 No, it’s not going to be code WCAG 2.2 success criteria (Level A and AA) first entry points New WCAG 2.2 success criteria First entry point Increase Wireframes +2 User Stories +3 Style Guides +3 Content 0 Code 0 Design Comps 0 All WCAG 2.2 success criteria Primary entry point % # Wireframes 36% 21 User Stories 34% 20 Style Guides 22% 13 Content 3% 2 Code 3% 2 Design Comps 0% 0 Style Guides User Stories User Stories Wireframes Style Guides Content Code Wireframes
- 23. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 23 Trending away from code WCAG success criteria first deliverable entry points (version 2.0 through 2.2) +122% User stories (since 2.0) Style guide nearly doubled Code unchanged WCAG Version 2.0 2.1 2.2 Wireframes 19 19 21 User Stories 9 17 20 Style Guide 7 10 13 Content 1 2 2 Code 2 2 2 Design Comps 0 0 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 1.0 2.0 3.0 User stories Wireframes Style guides Content Code
- 24. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 24 What? Knowledge needed to ensure accessibility
- 25. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 25 What type of knowledge is needed to make the decisions? Identify the fundamental background needed to define accessible results Accessibility-specific knowledge Not generally known outside of accessibility Additional training, often minor, will be needed for roles Best practices Already known by ownership roles Minor adjustments needed to apply them Standard features Common approaches “everybody” knows Requires little or no additional change
- 26. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 26 Is it accessibility-specific?
- 27. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 27 No, it’s still more about best practices WCAG 2.2 success criteria (Level A and AA) primary knowledge type required New WCAG 2.2 success criteria Knowledge type Increase Best Practices +5 Accessibility +3 Standard Features +0 All WCAG 2.2 success criteria Knowledge type % # Best Practices 55% 32 Accessibility 40% 23 Standard Features 5% 3 Best Practices Accessibility Best Practices Accessibility Standard Features
- 28. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 28 Trending away from accessibility WCAG success criteria primary knowledge type required (version 2.0 through 2.2) +4 Increase best practices over accessibility (since 2.0) Total now 9 more than a11y WCAG Version 2.0 2.1 2.2 Best Practices 20 27 32 Accessibility 15 20 23 Standard Features 3 3 3 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 1.0 2.0 3.0 Best Practices Accessibility Standard Features
- 29. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 29 Shift left …applying role-based analysis
- 30. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 30 Shift left: Existing products Direct issues to the original, primary decision maker QA / A11y testers Developers Content author Visual designer UX designer Business owner Direct A11y here
- 31. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 31 Shift left: New projects Make accessible decisions at the start QA / A11y testers Developers Content author Visual designer UX designer Business owner Add a11y here
- 32. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 32 Shift left: Training and deliverables Make accessible decisions at the start Distribute accessibility across roles • Identify the roles in the product lifecycle for your teams • Review success criteria or checkpoints for ownership levels Supplemental role-based training • Training focused on criteria and issues owned by each role • Leverage existing knowledge and best practices • Supplement with accessibility requirements Review deliverable • Perform accessibility “testing” of requirements and deliverable • Include sign-off by accessibility staff
- 33. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 33 DIY role-based analysis using ARRM resources Do try this at home work Role-based decision tree for all 3 ownership levels • https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Role-Based_Decision_Tree Role-specific templates • UX designer: bit.ly/arrm-uxdesign • Visual designer: bit.ly/arrm-uidesign • Content author: bit.ly/arrm-content • Developer: bit.ly/arrm-developers Accessibility Checkpoint List • https://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/wiki/Accessibility_Checkpoint_Master_List
- 34. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 34 Meet the criteria The 10 new WCAG 2.2 success criteria, with role-based analysis
- 35. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 35 The 10 WCAG 2.2 Success Criteria (6/23/2022 Working Draft) 1. SC2.4.11 Focus Appearance (Level AA) 2. SC2.4.12 Focus Not Obscured (Minimum) (Level AA) 3. SC2.4.13 Focus Not Obscured (Enhanced) (Level AAA) 4. SC2.4.14 Page Break Navigation (Level A) 5. SC2.5.7 Dragging Movements (Level AA) 6. SC2.5.8 Target Size (Minimum) (Level AA) 7. SC3.2.6 Consistent Help (Level A) 8. SC3.3.7 Accessible Authentication (Level AA) 9. SC3.3.8 Accessible Authentication (Level AAA) 10.SC3.3.9 Redundant Entry (Level A) And one additional change • SC2.4.7 Focus Visible (WCAG 2.0) promoted from Level AA to A
- 36. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 36 SC2.4.11 Focus Appearance (Level AA) When a user interface component has keyboard focus, one or both of the following is true: 1. The focus indicator: • encloses the visual presentation of the user interface component, and • has a contrast ratio of at least 3:1 between the same pixels in the focused and unfocused states, and • has a contrast ratio of at least 3:1 against adjacent colors. 2. An area of the focus indicator meets all the following: • is at least as large as the area of a 1 CSS pixel thick perimeter of the unfocused component, or is at least as large as a 4 CSS pixel thick line along the shortest side of the minimum bounding box of the unfocused component, and • has a contrast ratio of at least 3:1 between the same pixels in the focused and unfocused states, and • has a contrast ratio of at least 3:1 against adjacent non-focus-indicator colors, or is no thinner than 2 CSS pixels. Where a user interface component has active sub-components, if a sub-component receives a focus indicator, these requirements may be applied to the sub-component instead. Exceptions: • The focus indicator is determined by the user agent and cannot be adjusted by the author, or • The focus indicator and the indicator's background color are not modified by the author.
- 37. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 37 SC2.4.11 Focus Appearance (Level AA) – Continued Analysis Given its complexity it’s not certain this criterion is truly final It is clearly designed to close all the gaps in WCAG 2.0 and 2.1 related to visible focus Primary owner • Visual Designer Secondary • UX Designer Contributor • none First deliverable • Style Guide Knowledge type • Accessibility
- 38. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 38 SC2.4.12 Focus Not Obscured (Minimum) (Level AA) When a user interface component receives keyboard focus, the component is not entirely hidden due to author-created content. Analysis Companion to SC2.4.11 Fairly straightforward Vague on a minimum amount of focus that cannot be hidden Primary owner • Visual Designer Secondary • UX Designer Contributor • none First deliverable • Style Guide Knowledge type • Accessibility
- 39. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 39 SC2.4.13 Focus Not Obscured (Enhanced) (Level AAA) When a user interface component receives keyboard focus, no part of the focus indicator is hidden by author-created content. Analysis Desirable best practice Explicitly eliminates the minimum visibility (vagueness) loophole in SC2.4.12 Primary owner • Visual Designer Secondary • UX Designer Contributor • none First deliverable • Style Guide Knowledge type • Accessibility
- 40. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 40 SC2.4.14 Page Break Navigation (Level A) For web content with page break locators, a mechanism is available to navigate to each locator. Analysis Mainly for printed or print-based documents Best practice: Obvious reason • Ensures everyone can “open your textbooks to page so-and-so” Primary owner • UX designer Secondary • Content author Contributor • Developer First deliverable • Wireframes • Possibly content Knowledge type • Best practice
- 41. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 41 SC2.5.7 Dragging Movements (Level AA) All functionality that uses a dragging movement for operation can be achieved by a single pointer without dragging, unless dragging is essential or the functionality is determined by the user agent and not modified by the author. Analysis Closes loophole in SC2.5.1 Pointer Gestures, Level A (WCAG 2.1) Best practice: Dragging, especially drag and drop, are not obvious actions for any user. Primary owner • UX Designer Secondary • Developer? Contributor • none First deliverable • User stories Knowledge type • Best practice
- 42. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 42 SC2.5.8 Target Size (Minimum) (Level AA) The size of the target for pointer inputs is at least 24 by 24 CSS pixels, except where: • Spacing: The target offset is at least 24 CSS pixels to every adjacent target; • Inline: The target is in a sentence or block of text; • Necessary: A particular presentation of the target is essential or is legally required for the information being conveyed; • Legal: A particular presentation of the target is legally required.
- 43. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 43 SC2.5.8 Target Size (Minimum) (Level AA) – Continued Analysis Addresses gap with SC2.5.5 Target Size (Enhanced) (WCAG 2.1) when made Level AAA • Concerns raised about tools, toolbars, content layouts, etc. prevented AA requirement Best Practice: 48x48 pixels still common mobile device standard (iOS, Android, Microsoft) Primary owner • Visual designer Secondary • UX designer? Contributor • none First deliverable • Style guide Knowledge type • Best practice
- 44. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 44 SC3.2.6 Consistent Help (Level A) If a web page contains any of the following help mechanisms, and those mechanisms are repeated on multiple web pages within a set of web pages, they occur in the same relative order to other page content, unless a change is initiated by the user: • Human contact details; • Human contact mechanism; • Self-help option; • A fully automated contact mechanism.
- 45. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 45 SC3.2.6 Consistent Help (Level A) – Continued Analysis Does not require help! Addresses “gap” in SC3.2.3 Consistent Navigation (Level AA, WCAG 2.0) Extends consistency to help – if present Best Practice: Consistent navigation should include consistent help navigation Primary owner • UX Designer Secondary • Visual Designer Contributor • none First deliverable • Wireframes Knowledge type • Best Practice
- 46. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 46 SC3.3.7 Accessible Authentication (Level AA) For each step in an authentication process that relies on a cognitive function test, at least one other authentication method is available that does not rely on a cognitive function test, or a mechanism is available to assist the user in completing the cognitive function test. Exception: When the cognitive function test is to recognize common objects or content the user provided to the website.
- 47. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 47 SC3.3.7 Accessible Authentication (Level AA) – Continued Analysis A very significant success criterion for cognition: password memorization is common challenge Seeks to use more biometric (face, fingerprint), security fobs, and other 2-factor approaches Details will be critical since they do apply to most passwords Common solution may be ensuring password managers or basic copy and paste are supported Primary owner • UX designer Secondary • Business owner • Developer Contributor • none First deliverable • User stories Knowledge type • Accessibility
- 48. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 48 SC3.3.8 Accessible Authentication (No Exceptions) (Level AAA) For each step in an authentication process that relies on a cognitive function test, at least one other authentication method is available that does not rely on a cognitive function test, or a mechanism is available to assist the user in completing the cognitive function test. Analysis Removes loophole in (new) SC3.3.7 Accessible Authentication Primary owner • UX designer Secondary • Business owner • Developer Contributor • none First deliverable • User stories Knowledge type • Accessibility
- 49. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 49 Conclusions WCAG 2.2 role-based analysis and trends
- 50. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 50 WCAG 2.2 analysis and trends Based upon latest editor’s draft Developers are #4, not #1 in ownership • Other roles make and own the decisions that impact accessibility Code is first entry point < 5% of the time • Design deliverables are overwhelmingly the first source of accessibility decisions Over half of success criteria knowledge is not specific to accessibility • Ownership roles should already know a lot required to make accessible decision All trends are moving away from “the assumption” • Developer ownership and code as entry point relatively unchanged • Accessibility requirement increasing at slower rate than best practices Shifting left is not only possible but necessary for efficiency • Identify owners, provide supplementary training, design and document early and often
- 51. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 51 What to do with WCAG 2.2 Wait for now, then… Latest update from WCAG 2 team is still “finalized draft: September 2022” • And “draft” does necessarily mean “official recommendation” When it’s (finally) an official recommendation – Review it • Review the approved success criteria and get to understand them • Evaluate their potential impact to your websites and digital products Decide when to support – WCAG 2.2 conformance requirements vary • Sect. 508 – Still WCAG 2.0 • EN 301 549 – Now WCAG 2.1, likely to move to 2.2 over next years • Sect. 1557 of ACA – Technically takes effect when official… but mainly 2.0 still If you support WCAG 2.1 now, plan to support 2.2 using the similar timeline
- 52. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 52 Beyond WCAG 2.2 WCAG 3.0
- 53. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 53 What will be in WCAG 3.0? No “WC”, just “AG” AKA “Silver” • No longer web-specific • Mobile apps, and other emerging technology (such as voice) New non-binary (Pass/Fail) scoring system (proposed) • Olympic medals: Gold, Silver, Bronze • Scoring accounts and considers “critical” failures Not direct extension of WCAG 2.x • Will be full rewrite (like WCAG 1.0 to 2.0) • No POUR • Replacing existing numbering system (with none?) • Success criteria will be accounted for (likely to see some official harmonization system)
- 54. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 54 Not coming soon to a digital device near you Promises after WCAG 2.1 were there would not be significant delays • WCAG 2.2 running over two full years beyond original plans (oops!) • WCAG 3.0 is still around four years out based on recent comments Major rewrites likely to generate long delays • AG Working Group has a huge task that will not be easy Only limited working content and examples in working draft December 7, 2021 • Pearl Harbor?
- 55. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 55 Q&A
- 56. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved. 56 Thank you.
- 57. Optum is a registered trademark of Optum, Inc. in the U.S. and other jurisdictions. All other brand or product names are the property of their respective owners. Because we are continuously improving our products and services, Optum reserves the right to change specifications without prior notice. Optum is an equal opportunity employer. © 2022 Optum, Inc. All rights reserved.