Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: COGA summary, key questions, and minutes for March 31st meeting

Hi all, keeping in mind previous conversations about the importance of
using the word "disabilities," please consider the following approach,
which incorporates:

   - the subtitle that Rain suggested this morning
   - a linkable umbrella phrase in the abstract: "disabilities and
   differences that impact cognitive accessibility"
   - repeated emphasis on "cognitive accessibility" from the title,
   "disabilities" needed for legal protections, and "differences" that covers
   neurodivergence in a non-offensive way

If we go this route, the top of the document could look like this:

*Title: *
Cognitive accessibility guidance

*Subtitle: *
Making content usable for people who experience barriers to technology
related to cognitive, learning, intellectual, and developmental
disabilities, as well as neurodivergence and mental health

*Abstract/introduction first sentence:*
This document explains how to make content usable for people with [disabilities
and differences that impact cognitive accessibility ( ← link to resource
that we need to create)] including cognitive, learning, intellectual, and
developmental disabilities, as well as neurodivergence and mental health

*Link or pop-up list for "*disabilities and differences that impact
cognitive accessibility*":*
This link or pop-up list is where we will discuss the full bulleted list of
disabilities covered, including making clear that "learning disabilities"
means one thing in the UK and a very different thing in the U.S.

On Tue, Apr 1, 2025 at 8:41 AM Monteleone, Rebecca <
Rebecca.Monteleone@utoledo.edu> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
>
>
> Just chiming in to +1 Rain’s point that neurodivergence as a term was
> developed specifically in part to move away from a disability or diagnostic
> category, and so we may alienate potential users that way, and that this
> still does not adequately address intellectual and developmental disability.
>
>
>
> If we explain what groups are covered under our umbrella in the
> introduction, could we just then refer to them as something like “users who
> benefit from cognitive accessibility” in the text itself?
>
>
>
> Warmly,
>
>
>
> Becca
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Lisa Seeman <lisa1seeman@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, April 1, 2025 7:52 AM
> *To:* Rain Michaels <rainb@google.com>
> *Cc:* Julie Rawe <jrawe@understood.org>; public-cognitive-a11y-tf <
> public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org>
> *Subject:* [EXTERNAL] Re: COGA summary, key questions, and minutes for
> March 31st meeting
>
>
>
> Hi Rain
>
> Thanks for the feedback.
>
> We agreed  to use cognative accessibility guidance where ot fits. However
> there were a bunch of times where we are talking about the users and we
> needed an inclusive way to refer to them.
>
> Do you think just alling them our users is ok? Assume we have who is
> included discussed in the into.
>
>
>
> All the best
>
> Lisa
>
>
>
> On Tue, 1 Apr 2025, 14:03 Rain Michaels, <rainb@google.com> wrote:
>
> I share Lisa's concern.
>
>
>
> If I understand correctly, the * problems we are trying to solve* in the
> language of the subtitle are:
>
>    1. We cover more than just "cognitive disabilities" and "learning
>    disabilities," and since diagnostic terms in different countries have
>    different meanings and legal implications, this even leaves some people out.
>    2. We learned in our user research that some felt alienated and unseen by
>    "cognitive and learning disabilities" because it didn't include them.
>    This includes folks with functional needs related to what we are covering
>    due to mental health, neurodivergence, and developmental disabilities or
>    intellectual disabilities.
>
> The concerns I have with "cognitive and neurodivergent disabilities"
>
>    1. Not all individuals who are neurodivergent identify with their
>    neurodivergence as a disability. I believe we could truly alienate a lot of
>    people this way.
>    2. "Neurodivergence" is still a fairly academic term, and not well
>    recognized throughout communities. I'm worried that many people won't
>    understand what it means.
>    3. This still leaves out individuals with developmental disabilities,
>    intellectual disabilities (which has varying diagnostic meanings based on
>    geographical boundaries), and now also learning disabilities (which also
>    has varying diagnostic meanings based on geographical boundaries).
>
> Since we are levering the subtitle approach, we have flexibility to be
> more verbose. For example, one approach might be to just list them. As an
> example:
>
>
>
> *Cognitive accessibility guidance*
>
> Making content usable for people who experience barriers to technology
> related to cognitive, learning, intellectual, and developmental
> disabilities, as well as neurodivergence and mental health.
>
>
>
> Alternatively, we might anchor more on the need:
>
>
>
> *Cognitive accessibility guidance*
>
> Making content usable for people with disabilities or contexts that impact
> memory, learning, communication, attention, reading, executive function,
> (etc....).
>
>
>
> Rain
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [image: Google logo written with braille dots and ASL hands]
>
> *Rain Breaw Michaels*
>
> Design Lead, Products for All UX
>
> rainb@google.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Apr 1, 2025 at 3:44 AM Lisa Seeman <lisa1seeman@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi folks
>
> My issue with the suggested phrase is people with learning disabilities
> and specific learning disabilites and mental health related disabilities
> may not see themselves as included. Also cognative disabilities oftem mean
> something very specific such as MCI (mild cognative impaiment)
>
>
>
> What about just talking about "our use groups" or "our users" and
> explaining in the introduction who we are including?
>
>
>
> On Tue, 1 Apr 2025, 03:18 Julie Rawe, <jrawe@understood.org> wrote:
>
> Hi, folks, below is a summary of what we discussed at today's COGA task
> force meeting and key questions as we consider possibly replacing
> "cognitive and learning disabilities" with "cognitive and neurodivergent
> disabilities."
>
>
>
> *Summary:*
>
>    - We only got to the first item on the agenda: continuing the
>    discussion on how to replace "cognitive and learning disabilities" in the
>    next version of "Making Content Usable."
>    - We discussed how the new structure of "Making Content Usable" aims
>    to streamline the information overall and to keep the focus on telling
>    content creators and developers what to do. This approach may mean there
>    are fewer places in the next version where we need to use an umbrella
>    phrase.
>    - We reviewed the 343 section of this Github tracking doc
>    <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FkyRIP3CAuZ-JAazUOAUI64TYCrEfOkKSeBg94mMOkg/edit?resourcekey=0-HM4QyycKbkfCwWAXzIymrw&tab=t.0#heading=h.r0jc39bbtz1i>
>    that explains why the new umbrella phrase needs to include "disabilities."
>    (That word is essential because legal protections may not apply if we just
>    talk about "differences," "challenges," etc.)
>    - We added *"cognitive and neurodivergent disabilities"* to the table
>    suggesting new umbrella phrases.
>
>
>    - We talked about how when we use the umbrella phrase in regular text,
>       we can offer a pop-up that has a long bulleted list of examples of what is
>       covered under this phrase.
>       - We also talked about why we may need to use different versions of
>       the umbrella phrase in different places, such as the subtitle and
>       abstract/introduction, which are detailed in the next section.
>
> *Suggested wording for four key parts of Making Content Usable*
>
>    - *Title: *"Cognitive accessibility guidance"
>
>
>    - Rain's group suggested this title in Making Content Usable V2
>       Structure -- Text
>       <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GwIadQU2rmDwqPDeYX6PF7UjnD4D47vqRjvPysXNe-A/edit?tab=t.0#heading=h.8op9ructilp5>
>       .
>       - The task force discussed today why we like it, including that it
>       identifies the the purpose of the information that will be shared and is
>       short enough so it won't get truncated inappropriately.
>
>
>    - *Subtitle: *"Making content usable for individuals with cognitive
>    and neurodivergent disabilities, such as those that involve learning,
>    attention, memory, or mental health"
>
>
>    - The subtitle would use the new umbrella phrase plus a short "such
>       as" list that gives a sense of the breadth of disabilities covered.
>       - We discussed the importance of mentioning "mental health" in
>       particular.
>       - We also discussed why we need a phrase like "such as" so it's
>       clear this is not an exhaustive list.
>
>
>    - *Abstract/introduction first sentence:* “This document explains how
>    to make content usable for individuals with [cognitive and
>    neurodivergent disabilities ( ← link to resource that we need to
>    create)] such as anxiety, autism, age-related forgetfulness, dyslexia,
>    and Down syndrome."
>
>
>    - We talked about why it might help to mention some specific
>       conditions/diagnoses in this sentence. Much like the subtitle, we want
>       "such as" examples to show a wide range of disabilities. But the big
>       difference is that the abstract uses specific diagnostic terms that users
>       are likely to be searching for.
>       - In particular, we discussed that it might be helpful for the
>       document's SEO overall to mention "autism" in the abstract/introduction.
>       - If we go this route of mentioning a wide range of conditions, the
>       examples need to be carefully chosen—we pulled this together very quickly!
>
>
>    - *Link or pop-up list for "cognitive and neurodivergent
>    disabilities":* This link or pop-up list is where we will discuss the
>    full bulleted list of disabilities covered, including making clear that
>    "learning disabilities" means one thing in the UK and a very different
>    thing in the U.S.
>
> *Key questions*
>
>    - Does "cognitive and neurodivergent disabilities" translate easily
>    into other languages?
>    - What keywords should we put in the title, subtitle, abstract, and/or
>    metadata to help people find this document using search engines?
>
> *Minutes:* https://www.w3.org/2025/03/31-coga-minutes.html
>
>
>
> Thanks again to Eric for scribing. Have a good week, everybody!
>
>
>
> --
>
> [image: understood.logo] <https://www.understood.org/>
>
>   *Julie* *Rawe*
> *Director, Content Strategy & Accessibility*
> *jrawe@understood.org <jrawe@understood.org>*
> *www.understood.org <http://www.understood.org/>*
> she | her | hers
>
> [image: facebook icon] <https://www.facebook.com/Understood/>  [image:
> linkedin icon] <https://www.linkedin.com/company/understood/>  [image:
> instagram icon] <https://www.instagram.com/understoodorg/?hl=en>  [image:
> tiktok icon] <https://www.tiktok.com/@understood.org>   *Support us
> <https://www.understood.org/donate>*
>
>
>
>