Perfect timing for new WCAG 3 guideline considerations

May the 16th was a big day on many levels. It was the thirteenth Global Accessibility Awareness Day on global level and second official Global Accessibility Awareness Day in Slovenia.

But that was only the beginning if we consider that W3C Accessibility Guidelines (yes, not Web, but W3C – as this is WCAG 3) got a giant update of 12 new guidelines with 174 suggested outcomes (opens in new window). Please note – these are not a standard yet and serve only to collect potential outcomes that the WCAG 3 working group will be exploring. So – don’t throw away WCAG 2 yet – it is still latest standard (in most legislation version 2.1 and I suggest you embrace version 2.2 as a default as it will eventually replace 2.1), but it’s nice to be able to get a sense about the future.

12 exploratory guidelines with 174 suggested outcomes of WCAG 3

Once again – please remember – these are exploratory and far from being accepted. But they are still a good indication about what will potentially be relevant. Well, most of them are relevant already today, if we think about making things accessible and usable (and not just conformance to WCAG 2.x). We must also keep in mind that WCAG 3 wants to cover also non-author parts of accessibility (opens in new window), like for example Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines (ATAG) and User Agent Accessibility Guidelines (UAAG), so some guidelines are perhaps not targeting you personally.

The original document provides guidelines in lists with sublists, but I prefer table presentation for this situation, so that I know immediately the name of the guideline before the outcome. Please note that all links in the following table open in new window/tab.

WCAG 3 with 12 guidelines and 174 outcomes (16th May of 2024)

Guideline	Outcome	Count
Animation and movement	Audio shifting Flashing and strobing Motion	3
Forms, inputs, and errors	Allow automated entry Error association Error identification Error notification Input instructions Input labels Persistent error notification Visible error	8
Processes and task completion	Adequate time Action required Avoid manipulation Go back in process Inform at start No cognitive tests No memorization Optimized processes Optional information Preselections Save progress Steps and direction Task completion documentation	13
Image and media alternatives	AI editable Audio alternative in preferred language Audio descriptions Captions Complex image alternative Context in image alternative Decorative image alternative Descriptive transcripts Finding media alternatives Identify autogenerated text Image alternatives Image role Image type Images-of-Text alternatives Non-text alternatives Non-verbal cues Persistent figure captions Use of color Use of visual depth Use of sound Use of spatial audio	21
Interactive components	Behavior of controls Change focus with pointer device Control labels Conventions Consistent labels Control importance Control updates Deceptive controls Distinguishable controls Hover information Interaction indicators contrast Input control Name, role, value, state Non-Text contrast Notify on change Notify before activation Restore focus Relevant focus Target size Visual design of controls	20
Input / operation	Comparable keyboard effort Consistent keyboard interaction Focus in viewport Gestures & dragging Keyboard commands Keyboard focus location Keyboard only No keyboard trap Pointer-agnostic Pointer cancellation Pointer location Specific pressure Speed insensitive Keyboard mode Use without body movement Use without device movement Varied inputs	18
Layout	Clear navigation Clear relationships Clear starting point Citation Consistent order Content orientation Control location Current location Distinguishable relationships Distinguishable sections Familiar components and layout Focus retention Indicate 3rd party content Interface redesign Multistep process Notification of change Order of content Organized content Related information Reliable positioning Section headers Section length Section purpose Visual stimulation White spacing	25
Consistency across views	Consistent navigation Multiple ways Persistent navigation	3
Policy and Protection	Algorithm bias Clear agreement Disability information privacy Exploitive behaviors Redirection Sensitive information Social media algorithm	7
Text and Wording	Acronyms and abbreviations Ambiguous numerical formatting Ambiguous pronunciation Appropriate tone Conveying importance without sizing Double negatives Figurative language Interface Verbosity Lists Maximum text contrast Minimum text contrast Numbered steps Risk statements Semantic text appearance Sentence voice Single idea Summary Supplements to numerical concepts Text minimum Text style Text-to-speech supported Title Topic sentence Uncommon words Unnecessary words or phrases Verb tense	26
Help and feedback	Consistent help Contextual help Conversational support Data visualization help Feedback mechanism Help using new interfaces Personalizable help Sensory characteristics Supplements to text Support available	10
User Control	Adjust color Alternative presentation AT control Audio control Caption control Chunk content Clear background Control interruptions Disturbing content Haptic stimulation Interactive audio alternative Media alternative control Media chapters Preferences apply to printing. Reflow Text Customization 3rd party content presentation Transform content Triggers User settings Virtual cursor	21

Quick reflections

I didn’t have the time to really investigate into the details yet, but I still have some brief reflections that I want to express here;

• Some folks already expressed stress and overwhelm at the 174 new outcomes (knowing well that this is only the beginning). The Accessibility Guidelines Working Group (AGWG) tried hard to be clear about the temporary state of this situation, but it does indicate that WCAG 3 will most certainly outgrow WCAG 2.x. I think we need to make sure that UAAG and ATAG will be clearly marked, so that authors will find their responsibilities more effectively.
• It would also help if we would have at least a hint about priority of the outcomes (like levels A, AA and AAA). I know that it can take a lot of time and basically negotiations, but it would help understanding the intentions and probably also help with more discussions.
• Luckily there are a lot of outcomes that can be directly mapped to WCAG 2.X, so I do not consider the situation extremely new and revolutionary but I like that it really tries to be more distinct and also break some parts down, so that we will potentially have more segmented controls.

Once again – please consider this as a draft that will absolutely be changed. But also consider the fact that some outcomes are “on the radar” of the group and I can actually see the WCAG 3 to have a potential to improve also end user usability. It is still too early, but I like that progress is obvious and that GAAD got another dimension.