In short: WCAG 2.0 is here, it’s ready, now get on and use it.
Focus on the User
One of the main things I’ve noticed about WCAG 2.0 (and which has been the case for several versions now) is that it is much more focussed on the user and how the user interacts with the website [...]

There are 21 triple-A success criteria for WCAG 2.0. The WCAG 2.0 document itself specifies that AAA conformance should not be mandated for entire sites as:
…it is not possible to satisfy all Level AAA Success Criteria for some contentWCAG 2.0
Note that during the earlier working draft stage of this documentation it was proposed that AAA [...]

Part 3 of the look at WCAG 2.0 is going to look at the handful of criteria which make up Level AA. Here then, are the lucky 13.

WCAG 2.0 is not structured similarly to the WCAG 1.0 checklist, which listed all the single-A checkpoints, then the double-A checkpoints, then the triple-A checkpoints. This is probably partly because they don’t wish to imply that you can ‘cop out’ by conforming to one of the lower conformance levels, because doing so will still cause [...]

If you’ve already read what I’ve had to say about the earlier versions of WCAG 2.0 – from my initial dislike of the 2006 version, through to my acknowledgement that the 2007 version had improved immeasurably, then there’s going to be a certain amount of overlap here.
WCAG 2.0 has now reached Candidate Recommendation status which [...]

A phrase you might have come across, if you’ve looked into disability issues at all, particularly as they relate to the web, or you’ve looked at the topic of web accessibility is people who are sometimes termed internet disabled.
Now this isn’t an official term (at least, so far as I know), but from the contexts [...]

I’ve criticised the way that SOCITM have handled accessibility in their better connected report a couple of times before.
But while it is still very important, I feel, to stress the problems with using WCAG 1.0 as a simple measure of accessibility, and I feel that myself and others have been right to criticise SOCITM’s approach [...]

This is the question I’ve been asking myself for some time. Note specific use of the word measurement. I believe accessibility assessments are useful; but I’m not convinced that trying to assign a rating to a site is at all helpful and indeed I think it can actually be harmful.
I’ve been looking at the accessibility [...]

I am a believer in web accessibility. To me, this basically means attempting to make sites so that they are usable by as many people as possible; primarily avoiding discrimination users with disabilities, but also where possible seeking to ensure that sites can be used across different platforms and browsers, and so on.
Some people wouldn’t [...]

Okay, I know this report came out a little while ago, but I’ve been too busy with other stuff (working with the PSWMG to contribute to an accessibility supplement for SOCITM’s Better Connected report, amongst other things) and it’s been a while since I’ve had the opportunity to consider accessibility issues here.
So now I’m going [...]