8 suggestions to clarify the 2nd chapter ("Introduction") and make it easier to digest

[julierawe]

(1) Use more formatting to help chunk out the information and make it easier to digest. This is especially important for 2.2 (Background), which contains essential information but is hard to get through and grasp its meaning. Here are some suggestions that apply to 2.2 and may benefit the entire 2nd chapter:

• Boldface key phrases, similar to what you currently have in the Summary
• Make the list of 8 bullets in 2.2 less wordy and, if possible, avoid starting each of those bullets with "People with" (because that repetition makes the whole list blur together)
• Avoid long paragraphs (2.2 currently has some of the longest paragraphs in the whole document)
• Consider reorganizing part or all of the 2nd chapter as an FAQ with user-friendly boldface questions, e.g., "What are cognitive and learning disabilities?," "How common are cognitive and learning disabilities?," "Are these guidelines part of WCAG?," "Why are these guidelines voluntary?," etc

(2) Clarify 2nd paragraph in the introduction.

• What do you mean by “Some accessibility features will help people with cognitive impairments," and does the same statement apply to people with learning disabilities?
• What do you mean by "other factors that are difficult to include in general guidelines"? What are the other factors? And why are they difficult to include in general guidelines? Also, are you including "design, context, structure, language and usability" in the group of factors that are difficult to include in general guidelines?
• Current wording: "Traditionally, accessibility focused on making the interface usable for people with sensory and physical impairments (vision, hearing and/or mobility). Some accessibility features will help people with cognitive impairments. Often the issues that affect people with cognitive and learning disabilities include design, context, structure, language, usability, and other factors that are difficult to include in general guidelines."
• Suggested rewording: "Traditionally, accessibility focused on making the interface usable for people with sensory and physical impairments (vision, hearing and/or mobility). Some existing accessibility features help people with cognitive and learning disabilities. For example, some people with dyslexia use screen readers that were originally created for people who are blind. [PARAGRAPH BREAK] But there are many issues that affect people with cognitive and learning disabilities that are not addressed in WCAG's international standards. Issues such as design, context, structure, language, and usability are difficult to include in general guidelines because WHY."

(3) Make clearer that the COGA guidelines can be helpful to all web users, not just those with disabilities.

• You flick at this in the 3rd paragraph in the introduction ("While this guidance may improve usability for all, these patterns are essential for some people with cognitive and learning impairments to be able to use content independently"), but the point could be made more directly.
• We suggest making this an FAQ question, using boldface or finding some other way to call attention to this point, which may encourage more web developers to follow these voluntary guidelines.

(4) Define "usability."

• This is especially important if you want to keep the Venn diagram in this chapter.
• Right now it's not clear what usability is or how it relates to accessibility in general and to people with cognitive and learning disabilities in particular.

(5) Mention common conditions to help describe what you mean by "cognitive and learning disabilities." We know you're planning to add a glossary, but we think the introduction would greatly benefit by adding more specifics that help give readers a clearer idea of what you mean by cognitive and learning disabilities. In particular, we suggest mentioning many or all of the conditions in the "Personas" section, perhaps by adding a bulleted list like this:

"These guidelines are designed to make content more accessible to people with:

• Cognitive disabilities, such as attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, traumatic brain injury, memory loss, dementia, and post-stroke cognitive impairment
• Learning disabilities (often called "learning difficulties" or "learning differences") such as dyslexia and dyscalculia
• Intellectual disabilities, such as Down syndrome, fetal alcohol syndrome, and fragile X syndrome
• And disorders that affect communication, such as aphasia and autism spectrum disorder"

(6) Mention "intellectual disabilities" in the introduction and consider mentioning that "learning disabilities" can mean different things in different parts of the world.

• The current introduction does not mention "intellectual disabilities," but this phrase appears 6 times lower down in the document.
• Based on some of the wording in the current draft (e.g., “relatively minor learning disabilities, such as Dyslexia” in 4.5 Objective 4), we suspect the draft guidelines may be using “learning disabilities” as an umbrella term that includes intellectual disabilities.
• It's our understanding that what people in the U.K. call “learning disabilities” are called "intellectual disabilities" in the U.S. and that what people in the U.K. call “learning difficulties” are called "learning disabilities" in the U.S. (FYI, in the U.S., federal law requires public schools to choose one of 13 disability categories when categorizing the main reason why students qualify for special education; "learning disabilities" is one of these categories, and "intellectual disabilities" is another category.)
• The distinction between "learning disabilities" and "intellectual disabilities" could be made succinctly—the bulleted list we suggested in the 5th item above may be sufficient.

(7) Consider restructuring the list of 8 examples in 2.2.

• We appreciate the specific examples of how design, structure and language can make content inaccessible to people with different types of disabilities. But the current wording could be interpreted narrowly: “People with Disability A might struggle with Task X” whereas “People with Disability B might struggle with Task Y.” The truth is people with Disabilities A and B might struggle with both tasks.
• The last bullet is the only one that says "Many groups" will need support to minimize errors and complete their task. But many of the struggles in these bullets apply to "Many groups".
• Also, as noted above, each of the bullets are long and are worded in a way that makes them hard to digest, especially when there are so many bullets in this section.

Current wording: "Design, structure and language choices can make content inaccessible to people with cognitive and learning disabilities. Examples may include:

• People with impaired short term memory may be unable to recall passwords or copy access codes. They may have trouble or be unable to remember new symbols and interface paradigms;
• People with impaired working memory will only be able to hold one to three items in their memory at the same time. This can make it difficult to hold information temporarily or copy access codes.
• People with different processing speed capabilities may need additional time to understand the design relationships and volume of information on screen;
• People with language related disabilities may need simple clear language and instructions. Some may rely on supporting graphics and familiar symbols to understand content;
• People with social and/or communication disabilities may need clear literal language and may not understand metaphors or non-literal text and symbols;
• People with impairments that affect or comprehending mathematical concepts may not understand or confuse numerical references such as percentages;
• People who have issues with keeping or regaining focus may have difficulty completing a simple task if there are a lot of distractions and interruptions. They may need headers and signposts to help them regain the context after their attention has been lost (including in multimedia);
• Many groups will need support to minimize errors and complete their task. They will struggle with cognitive fatigue when completing complex, multi-stage processes such as filling out forms or entering data correctly or finding the content or feature that they need. These difficulties may sometimes also be experienced by users in the general population due to environmental or situational barriers,..."

Suggested rewording: "The choices that web developers make about design, structure and language can make content harder to access by people with different kinds of cognitive and learning disabilities. Common barriers for these users include:

• Recalling passwords and remembering new symbols and interface paradigms
• Copying access codes correctly
• Reading lengthy blocks of text
• Understanding metaphors or non-literal text and symbols
• Understanding numerical references such as percentages
• Completing a simple task if there are a lot of distractions and interruptions
• Completing complex, multi-stage processes such as filling out forms or entering data correctly
• Regaining the context after their attention has been lost (including in multimedia)

Web developers can reduce or remove barriers for people with cognitive and learning disabilities by choosing to provide:

• Additional time to help users understand the design relationships and volume of information on screen
• Simple clear language, supporting graphics and familiar symbols to help users understand the content
• Support to minimize errors and complete tasks" Cognitive and learning disabilities can be short-term, long-term or permanent. Even people who do not have a disability may experience these kinds of difficulties due to environmental or situational barriers,..."

(8) Clarify what is meant by "may be age related"

• Current wording: “Cognitive and learning disabilities are usually hidden difficulties and may be age related.”
• Suggested rewording: "Many people are born with cognitive and learning disabilities. And many people will acquire cognitive impairments as they get older. For example, the World Health Organization, estimates there are nearly 10 million new cases of dementia each year."
• FYI, we are suggesting including at least one prevalence stat way up high in the guidelines to help encourage web developers to follow these voluntary guidelines.

[jpascalides]

Thank you for your detailed feedback. The task force has reviewed your suggestions and have determined a path forward for each of the sub-issues that were submitted, as follows.

1. Use more formatting to help chunk information: Thank you for this suggestion. The task force conducted a thorough review of the document and organized in the most effective manner consistent with W3C style. We will also release an online version that will be able to chunk the information better.

2. Clarify 2nd paragraph in the introduction: Regarding your question about the statement "Some accessibility features will help people with cognitive impairments", the same statement does apply to individuals with learning disabilities. The task force has now included a point of clarification in the abstract, which is located at: https://raw.githack.com/w3c/coga/consistency_checks/content-usable/index.html#abstract

Regarding your question about the phrase "other factors that are difficult to include in general guidelines" this relates to personalization which is actively being addressed by the W3C's personalization task force. This text was agreed upon through consensus in the Accessibility Guidelines Working Group. Unfortunately, we need to publish version 1.0 in early 2021 and we are not able to adjust consensus text at this time.

3. COGA guidelines can be helpful to all web users: We have updated the language to state "While this guidance may improve usability for all, these patterns are essential for some people with cognitive and learning impairments to be able to use content independently."

4. Define usability: Thank you for your comment. Unfortunately, we need to publish version 1.0 in early 2021, but we will look into the issue for the next version of the document.

5. Mention common conditions to help describe what you mean by "cognitive and learning disabilities": This information is now included in the abstract. Thank you!

6. Mention intellection disabilities in the introduction and mention that learning disabilities can mean different things in different parts of the world: Thank you for this suggestion. The task force determined that consistent use of terminology throughout the document was essential and we would prefer to avoid making the change at this time.

7. Consider restructuring the list of 8 examples in 2.2: We truly appreciate your detailed feedback. Unfortunately, we need to publish version 1.0 in early 2021 and we are not able to adjust consensus text at this time.

8. Clarify what is meant by "may be age related": The task force has now included "age related memory loss" in the glossary.