It’s important not to confuse the version of the guidelines for public consultation (1.0, October 2007) with the approved version (1.1, June 2008). I realise that this has already been pointed out but the link to the PDF version and the quote of paragraphs one and two still refer to the older version. When linking to the guidance, please use the URL http://www.coi.gov.uk/guidance.php?page=129 This is the landing page which describes the guidance and provides links to the Word, PDF and HTML versions.

Thanks for the link to Julie Howell’s article, it’s an interesting piece. However, I read it slightly differently to you. Julie begins by saying that WCAG is ‘absolutely appropriate and remains the crucial foundation of every website’. No-one is suggesting that AA-conformance is sufficient for high quality websites. Since the 2004 research by the Disability Rights Commission, the prevailing opinion has been that WCAG conformance is necessary but not sufficient for high levels of accessibility.

The COI guidance is more closely linked to PAS 78. PAS 78 works alongside WCAG conformance and is an approach based on accessibility as a process. This process places greater emphasis on user involvement and developing an accessibility policy. That’s why, in addition to the requirements for AA-conformance, the COI guidance also requires the development of an accessibility policy and the use of methods for technical and usable accessibility testing. Therefore, AA-conformance is not sufficient to comply with the government guidelines. Neither is passing sets of automated tests as in the league table you have linked to.

I want to stress that these guidelines will develop over time. We have said that we will consider WCAG 2.0 when it’s finalised. Also, I’m involved in BS 8878. To keep up with these developments and to ensure the guidance remains relevant, we have set up an accessibility community on Digital People. I encourage those interested in delivering inclusive public sector websites to join this community. There are some interesting discussions taking place and your input would be more than welcome.

I should also add that a post on Accessibility Deadlines Set For UK Government Websites published on 19thJune 2008 on the E-Access Blog describes how the warning that non-compliant Web sites will be shut down has been toned down from the initial proposal – it now seems that such Web sites ‘may be at risk of being shut down.

I see that there does appear to be a fully updated version of the document including an HTML version.

Your quote appears to come from the older version of the document which gives end 2008 as the deadline. The new version has the correct dates. I got a bit confused by your reference to 2009 following a quote referring to 2008! That said, thanks for bringing this to my attention; I responded to the consultation, but no one in government has passed this news on to me (yet).

Simon Bains, Digital Library Manager, National Library of Scotland