This document summarizes considerations of accessibility that arise in the conduct of remote and hybrid meetings. Such meetings are mediated, for some or all participants, by real-time communication software typically built upon Web technologies. Issues of software selection, and the roles of meeting hosts and participants in providing access are explained. Relevant W3C documents are referred to, where applicable, as sources of more detailed and in some instances normative guidance.
Whereas the RTC Accessibility User Requirements [[raur]] address the design of the underlying technologies and software, the present document examines the accessibility of remote and hybrid meetings from a larger perspective. It is recognized that the accessibility of a meeting experience to participants with disabilities depends on a variety of conditions, only some of which are ensured by the design of the software used. Further conditions need to be put in place as part of the process of organizing and conducting the meeting itself, including the appropriate application of features offered by the meeting software as well as the preparation and advance distribution of accessible supporting documents.
This is a draft document that provides accessibility guidance on the use of remote meeting platforms in particular scenarios. Given increased reliance on different forms of remote interactions during the COVID-19 pandemic, it is vital to ensure accessibility of all kinds of remote interactions for people with disabilities, and to rapidly work to improve accessibility support in these technologies.
This document looks at the different processes and audiences associated with remote and hybrid meetings. This includes procurement considerations, platform development considerations, the accessibility of materials used during meetings and the use of accessibility features during meetings by hosts and participants.
For consistency and clarity, the following terms are used throughout this document, as defined here.
Remote meeting is an umbrella term used to describe real-time discussions or presentations held between two or more parties online. Other related terms often used include virtual meetings, online meetings, online presentations, and video conferencing. Webinars can also be considered remote meetings, however the interaction between presenter and attendee may be restricted.
A remote meeting generally requires the use of an online meeting platform on an online device such as a computer, smartphone or digital assistant that allows participants to interact with each other. Typical features of remote meeting platforms include the use of audio communication via an online microphone or traditional telephone, video communication via an online camera, a chat feature for text-based communication and the ability to share content. This can include the sharing of a participant’s computer screen, the sharing of an on-screen presentation with media-rich content such as slides and videos, and the transferring of files. In addition, remote meeting platforms generally have the ability for participants to allocate a meeting host who controls the features that are available to other participants.
There are a number of different platform delivery types. These include, but are not limited to
In broad terms, the accessibility requirements of standard remote meeting delivery rely on three distinct elements:
The accessibility challenges faced by people with disabilities participating in remote meetings will depend on how these three elements interact. An example that highlights the challenges across these three areas is the provision of captioned video. Suppose that a prerecorded video is to be played to meeting participants as part of a live presentation. In the case of the remote meeting platform, if captioned video playback is not implemented in the software then the tool fails the WCAG requirement. If the tool can support the playback of captioned video but the video itself does not have captions, the same accessibility issue occurs but for a different reason. Additionally, if both the meeting platform can support the display of captions, and the content contains captions, there is still the possibility that the host does not know how to enable the captions for viewing by all participants, leading to the accessibility issue occurring through yet another mechanism.
While the playback of captioned video highlights a consistent issue across all three elements, the barriers faced by people with disabilities will vary depending on the implementation of accessibility requirements and current limitations of remote meeting software. For example, interface elements for a remote meeting platform can be made operable for screen reader users, but content presented by screen sharing is unlikely to be available due to the way in which visual content is typically transferred as graphical data rather than in a form that can be readily processed by assistive technology. As such, specific guidance is needed for software developers, content producers and users respectively to ensure that best practice in remote meeting delivery is achieved. Hybrid meetings add another layer of complexity whereby audio, video and the distribution of meeting materials need to be accessible to all participants regardless of whether they are physically or remotely attending the meeting.
While W3C has applicable guidance across several standards and Notes relating to real-time communication and XR, it is this level of complexity that this document endeavours to address. In each instance, the level of responsibility for accessibility is different: for the remote meeting tool, guidance is required for developers of the platform. For presentation materials used during a remote meeting, the responsibility is with the content producer. If both of these elements cater effectively for people with disabilities, the final responsibility is with the host to ensure the accessibility features are enabled, or best efforts are made to ensure current limitations of the medium are overcome. In the case of hybrid meetings, there may be a shared responsibility between the online meeting host and the host of the physical meeting attendees.
For organisations considering these factors, there is also a need to explore appropriate procurement solutions. With the accessibility of remote meeting platforms varying considerably, it is an important consideration that accessibility criteria are prioritized when selecting a platform.
This section summarizes W3C guidance relevant to the selection and development of remote meeting software (i.e., meeting platforms) supporting users' access needs. Additional suggestions that extend beyond existing W3C guidance are also included.
Organizational roles associated with procurement will need carefully to examine the accessibility support and features in remote meeting software before committing to its purchase. The following guidance can help to identify which remote meeting platforms support accessibility requirements.
Persons responsible for procuring or selecting a platform on which to conduct remote meetings should
More generally, selecting an appropriate platform can be accomplished by reviewing the extent to which each of the available options supports the applicable standards identified in this document. The commitment of the chosen platform's developers to maintaining and enhancing accessibility-related aspects of the software is an important consideration in making a suitable choice.
The developers of remote meeting products may publish, or provide on request, an Accessibility Conformance Report based on the Voluntary Product Accessibility Template (VPAT) [[vpat]]. This report assesses the software with respect to public-sector procurement standards established in the European Union (EN 301 549 [[en-301-549]]) and in the United States (36 CFR Part 1194 [[36-cfr-1194]]), which in turn incorporate the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines, together with other accessibility requirements. Such information, if verified as accurate, provides an important basis for assessing the extent to which a remote meeting platform is likely to meet the accessibility-related needs of its users. Nevertheless, as noted elsewhere in this document, current technical accessibility standards do not fully address user needs associated with remote meeting applications. Therefore, additional evaluations are desirable to identify relevant features provided by remote meeting platforms that extend beyond what is required for conformance to technical accessibility standards, and which may not be documented in an Accessibility Conformance Report.
Software developers who create and maintain remote meeting software should ensure that accessibility features and support for accessible user interface elements are included in their products. W3C provides a number of accessibility resources that can assist along with other guidance in this section.
The W3C Web Accessibility Initiative contains three guidelines and two Notes that provide assistance to the creation of accessible remote meeting platforms. Such guidance can also serve as a basis for criteria with which to evaluate the accessibility of remote meeting platforms, thus facilitating platform selection as well as development. These W3C resources include standards relating to web content, user agents and authoring tools along with non-normative notes relating to real-time communication and XR accessibility
Guidance in the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 [[wcag21]] standard applies to user interface elements in remote meeting software.
Live audio and video communications that take place among meeting participants are also subject to the Web content Accessibility Guidelines. These are the real-time communication components of the meeting. The following WCAG 2.1 success criteria provide support for accessibility of live audio and video:
Sign language interpretation greatly facilitates accessibility of meetings for sign language users. Sign language interpretation is a Level AAA requirement of WCAG 2.1 for prerecorded audio content only. However, sign language can be streamed into a videoconference window during a live videoconferencing session; this may need clarification in future versions of the Guidelines.
The following success criteria are relevant to the design and implementation of meeting platforms.
- 1.1.4 Facilitate Clear Display of Alternative Content for Time-based Media:
For recognized on-screen alternative content for time-based media (e.g. captions, sign language video), the following are all true: (Level A)
Don't obscure controls: Displaying time-based media alternatives doesn't obscure recognized controls for the primary time-based media.
Don't obscure primary media: The user can specify that displaying time-based media alternatives doesn't obscure the primary time-based media.
Note: Depending on the screen area available, the display of the primary time-based media (slides, documents, etc.) may need to be reduced in size to meet this requirement.
- 1.1.5 Provide Configurable Alternative Content Defaults:
The user can specify which type(s) of alternative content to render by default for each type of non-text content, including time based media. (Level AA)
- 1.1.6 Use Configurable Text for Time-based Media Captions:
For recognized on-screen alternative content for time-based media (e.g. captions, sign language video), the user can configure recognized text within time-based media alternatives (e.g. captions) in conformance with 1.4.1. (Level AA)
- 1.1.7 Allow Resize and Reposition of Time-based Media Alternatives:
The user can configure recognized alternative content for time-based media (e.g. captions, sign language video) as follows: (Level AAA)
Resize: The user can resize alternative content for time-based media to at least 50% of the size of the top-level viewports.
Reposition: The user can reposition alternative content for time-based media to two or more of the following: above, below, to the right, to the left, and overlapping the primary time-based media.
Note 1: Depending on the screen area available, the display of the primary time-based media can need to be reduced in size or hidden to meet this requirement.
Note 2: Implementation can involve displaying alternative content for time-based media in a separate viewport, but this is not required.
Reference for 1.1.7
The Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines (ATAG) 2.0 [[atag20]] offers normative guidance concerning the development of authoring tools that support the creation of content. This is relevant in the context of extended remote meeting platforms such as conference hubs and LMS platforms where remote functionality is an embedded function. People with disabilities will therefore need to be able to use the frontend and backend processes of these platforms (ATAG 2.0 Part A).
Important considerations relating to the real-time communication development aspects of remote meeting platforms are addressed in greater detail in RTC Accessibility User Requirements [[raur]] (W3C Working Group Note). Notably, meeting platforms should include
Important considerations relating to the development of remote meeting platforms that make use of immersive environments are addressed in greater detail in the XR Accessibility User Requirements [[xaur]].
An example of where this guidance may be helpful is if a meeting were to take place entirely in virtual reality. XAUR can assist developers creating remote meeting platforms for this purpose to ensure people with disabilities can effectively participate.
In addition to existing W3C WAI guidance, meeting platform developers should
In order for remote meetings to be accessible, the content used within a meeting, such as presentation slides and reference documents, also need to be made accessible. Limitations of the remote meeting software may make it necessary to distribute these documents separately. The following sections provide W3C guidance on content preparation and other practical guidance.
Any prepared content (e.g., documents, presentation slides, prerecorded multimedia) that is shared with or shown to meeting participants is subject to the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG). Policies typically specify that documents, presentations and related materials should conform to WCAG 2.1 Level AA.
By ensuring that content intended to be presented during a meeting conforms to WCAG, the files can be made available directly to people with disabilities who use assistive technologies such as screen readers. It should be noted that screen sharing
techniques, which transfer rasterized images of documents, do not support accessibility by screen reader users. Therefore, content intended for use or presentation at a meeting should be offered to meeting participants in its original file format or via a delivery mechanism that preserves its document structure and relationships in a way that is compatible with assistive technologies.
Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines (ATAG) 2.0 [[atag20]] offers normative guidance concerning the development of authoring tools that support the creation of content that meets WCAG accessibility requirements. ATAG 2.0 also specifies requirements for accessibility of the user interface of an authoring tool.
Although a meeting platform is not, in itself, an authoring tool, authoring tools are used to prepare materials such as presentations and documents for dissemination in remote meetings. These tools include document editing and file format conversion software. In addition, a meeting platform may be integrated with an authoring tool to enable the real-time, collaborative writing or editing of documents or other content during a meeting.
In summary, ATAG 2.0 is applicable as follows.
Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines 2.0 does not address the full range of accessibility issues associated with collaborative, real-time editing systems. Until appropriate guidance is developed, implementers of such tools should refer to the research literature on the accessibility of collaborative editors.
The successful delivery of a remote meeting will require an awareness from the meeting host and participants as to what accessibility features are available and how to ensure they are available to all participants. Guidance for hosts and participants is provided as best practice.
In addition, the following Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) resources should be consulted as complements to this document.
Hosts in remote meetings should
A more detailed elaboration of users' accessibility needs in these scenarios may be found in the RTC Accessibility User Requirements [[raur]], the main points of which are summarized in section .
Participants in remote meetings should
Hosts for hybrid meetings need to ensure that all participants can access all aspects of a meeting, regardless of whether they are physically present or joining remotely. Issues may include audio, video or content being only available to people attending in person or exclusively for people joining in remotely. The following guidance can help you ensure that your meeting is accessible to all.
Accessible hybrid meetings have aspects in common with accessible in-person presentations. See [[accessible-presentations]] for an overview of the latter.