search

w3c / epub-specs

Shared workspace for EPUB 3 specifications.
Other
303 stars 60 forks source link

Rechecking accessibility #1470

Closed mattgarrish closed 3 years ago

mattgarrish commented 3 years ago

The accessibility specification is currently silent about when publications need to be retested.

Although each release of a publication is typically a point-in-time event, we should consider some level of recommendation for re-releasing content (whether it has previously been checked and not).

iherman commented 3 years ago

The issue was discussed in a meeting on 2021-03-25

List of resolutions:

View the transcript ### 2. Rechecking accessibility _See github issue [#1470](https://github.com/w3c/epub-specs/issues/1470)._ **Matt Garrish:** this came up in ISO. How long does the certification of content being accessible last for? e.g. For website the certification might degrade over 5 years, after which the accessibility certification might not be trustworthy anymore … less of a concern for packaged up epubs that shouldn't change … but what about reissues of epubs? … should we have guidance for that? A specific recommendation? Leave it to authors? **Avneesh Singh:** it will depend on publisher processes **Gregorio Pellegrino:** we check all the books published by our members … we hash each epub … so when we get a new file that matches an existing isbn, we match the hashes … if hash mismatch, we recheck a11y **Charles LaPierre:** for GCA, once we certify a publisher, they can stamp all books coming off that workflow as certified … but the publisher must get recertified each year … and that recertification process will bring them up to the state of the art … if they then reissue epub after that point, then they can update the certification as well … i.e. our solution is to keep the publisher up to date **Avneesh Singh:** if the user gets an old ebook, say 3 years old, how can the user ensure that the latest revision is accessible? **Charles LaPierre:** the user would just refer to the a11y metadata in the reprint. And it would be up to the publisher to use the latest standards in the publishing pipeline … between recertifications, we leave this up to the publisher **Ben Schroeter:** if its a new edition, i would consider that a new publication … that would go through whatever processes the publisher uses for normal a11y check … in terms of GCA certified publishers … i can see a case where a title goes through the certified workflow, but on republication changes are made (e.g. inserted image) that doesn't conform with a11y standards … this is a potential gap … and also, we may be moving towards a world in which there are more and more frequent updates to epubs **Wendy Reid:** any guidelines we put in place will have to apply across the board - from GCA certified to micro indie publisher … for a lot of repubs, the content of the book is not really changing (maybe just update to copyright page or something) … so we have to be careful of mandating recheck on "new hash" or every new revision … maybe qualify by saying "if adding new content" or "if substantially changing content" > *Charles LaPierre:* +1 Wendy **Wendy Reid:** but have exclusion for if you are just fixing typos or updating marketing material … also, re. comparison between epub and website, epubs don't replicate at the same rate **Matt Garrish:** i think it has to be an informative section … what wendyreid has described is similar to the qualifications that we once had on release identifier … this is probably as far as we can go … don't want to get mired in questions of what it means to recheck … maybe just say that standards change, and that when you do something to your epub you should just make sure that you are on top of the latest standards **Gregorio Pellegrino:** one of our ideas was to add date of certification … e.g. in accessibility summary **Charles LaPierre:** the idea of a certification date is something we could definitely add … that way publishers could change the certification date, or not, when they make other changes to the epub … i'm wondering about if the publisher modifies something 3 years from now, and URLs for conformsTo have changed … do they change the URLs to new URLs, or leave them as what they were at the point of initial certification? **Matt Garrish:** hard question to answer, because we're not negating the old standards … maybe the date based system is a good way to go … hard to make normative statements because of all the possibilities … maybe we could rely on legislation to set the rules, and just offer some guidance **Avneesh Singh:** we can start by providing non-normative text like mgarrish suggested … let this mature for some number of years, and then revisit it **George Kerscher:** when a publisher is doing update or new edition, if they have switched to a11y 1.1, wouldn't they just start using the correct metadata URLs at that point? … publishers are not all going to go from a11y 1.0 to 1.1 all at once > **Proposed resolution: add non-normative text in ePUB Accessibility suggesting rechecking the publications for major changes that could effect accessibility** *(Avneesh Singh)* > *Wendy Reid:* +1 > *Charles LaPierre:* +1 > *Gregorio Pellegrino:* +1 > *Matthew Chan:* +1 > *Bill Kasdorf:* +1 > *Will:* + > *Matt Garrish:* +1 > *Ben Schroeter:* +1 > *Will:* +1 > ***Resolution #2: add non-normative text in ePUB Accessibility suggesting rechecking the publications for major changes that could effect*** **Avneesh Singh:** we'll work on the specific guidance language over on the issue tracker > *George Kerscher:* +1