rachaelbradley
commented
2 years ago Thank you for your comment. We have assigned it to the milestone where we will address test types. You may see discussion in the comment thread and we may ask for additional information as we work on it. We will mark the official response when we are finished and close the issue.
We will once again applaud WCAG 3.0’s initiative on changing the approach on scoring and evaluation of conformance through different levels of conformance. It seems to be more nuanced and suitable for giving acknowledgement for good work amongst those who do not fully comply.
It is said in the draft that “Each method contains tests and techniques for satisfying the outcome”. “Technique” is defined as “Technology-specific approach to follow a method”.
We welcome a more unified approach on the understanding of the requirements, but we would like to stress that standardised tests must manage to keep up with technology. The introduction of WCAG in EU’s framework on harmonised standards to the Web Accessibility Directive underlines the importance of automatic testing, to be able to scale up the testing in order to meet the directive’s requirements and agencies’ need for adequate automatic testing.
From an agency’s point of view, we would therefore like to emphasise the importance WCAG 3.0 being suitable for legal administrative processes and reactions. Are the techniques meant to be binding for the assessment, and is the possibility for automatic testing a topic when developing the techniques, structure and content of 3.0?