Thread:Talk:Groups/Proposals/Accessibility Tracking/Collaboration with local wikipedias and their guidelines

I have a question concerning the proposed approach. Three major Wikipedias have their own set of accessibility guidelines. They are far from perfect, but in their imperfections they reflect the current status of the collaboration between accessibility promoters and the community. I mean to say that some accessibility guidelines may be purposefully imperfect. Because the perfect solution was disliked by the community, or because its implementation placed too much burden on editors, or because editors made too many mistakes while following a complex guideline.

How the proposed guidelines here will interact with local guidelines?

Another fundamental question would be "how much importance will we give to software improvements". Notably those that would make it easier for editors to create accessible content. This option has been neglected by both us and the WMF im the past. What priority will we give to the software approach ?