CFAA Response to WCAG 3.0 Draft Release - 2.2.3 Clear Meaning, Foundational Requirement: Unambiguous Text

[ChrisP-CFAA]

We are concerned that the current classification of unambiguous text as a foundational requirement. Unambiguous text should not be foundational for the following reasons:

• The concept of "unambiguous" is subjective and varies depending on interpretation.
• Not all authors are going to be aware of all possible interpretations of a word or phrase.
• Ambiguity is sometimes crucial to the content of a website, as it allows for the communication of subtle or nuanced ideas. Much informal language is inherently non-literal, even that which would normally not be classified as poetry or artistic work.
• In some cases, ambiguity itself is essential to the meaning of a sentence, particularly humour (e.g., “Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana”), and no unambiguous alternative can convey the same idea.

This requirement could inadvertently result in websites becoming overly simplified or corporate in style solely to meet accessibility standards, potentially undermining the richness of diverse web content.
We recommend one of the following changes:

1. Remove the requirement from the foundational guidelines, making it applicable only in specific contexts (e.g., government websites).
2. Expand the exceptions to exempt non-corporate websites (e.g., hobbyist sites etc.) from this requirement.