About this initiative

Full title

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING DECISION (EU) …/… establishing a model accessibility statement in accordance with Directive (EU) 2016/2102 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the accessibility of the websites and mobile applications of public sector bodies

Directorate-General for Communications Networks, Content and Technology
Download (126.4 KB - PDF - 3 pages)
Download (142.9 KB - PDF - 4 pages)

Give your feedback

Feedback period
18 May 2018 - 15 June 2018
Feedback status: Closed

The Commission would like to hear your views.

All feedback

Subscribe to receive notifications

Get notified by e-mail when new initiatives are added.
If you already have an account please log in.
Otherwise create an account using the Register button below.

Recent feedback

  • Daniela Di Gianantonio (Italy)
    15 June 2018 EU citizen
    Daniela Di Gianantonio (Italy)

    Art. 2 It is understandable that making the machine-readable format a mandatory requirement would have exceeded the scope of WAD. Nevertheless, Member States should be somehow encouraged to implement machine-readable accessibility statements, so that they could easily monitor the validity of the statements and use these data to complement the monitoring data. Art 3 Suggest to better explain “method”. It is confusing whether it refers to the...

  • Anonymous (Romania)
    15 June 2018 EU citizen
    Anonymous (Romania)

    In general I welcome the way the act proposes to deal with the accessibility statement. Nevertheless, the accessibility evaluation report and the formal endorsement of the statement should be made mandatory, instead of being optional elements of the accessibility statement. Furthermore, minor adjustments are also necessary at the following points: 1. Annex, section "Compliance Status" and section "Non-Accessible Content" One uses the term ...

  • Funka Nu AB (Sweden)
    15 June 2018 Company/business organisation
    Funka Nu AB (Sweden)

    The overall approach of the model accessibility statement is good. However, the link to an evaluation is only optional, which means the website owner does not have to publish it. This is surprising, given that the directive explicitly state that the statement must be ”detailed, comprehensible and clear” (article 7). That can not reasonably be done without making the evaluation results public, since an evaluation report of a website usually...

  • Funka Nu AB (Sweden)
    15 June 2018 Company/business organisation
    Funka Nu AB (Sweden)

    This feedback was removed either at the request of the author or because it did not comply with the European Commission's rules for publishing feedback and suggestions.

  • Ministry of Local Government and Modernisation (Norway)
    15 June 2018 Public authority
    Ministry of Local Government and Modernisation (Norway)

    Please find attached Norways comments on the draft implementing acts.

  • Anonymous (Netherlands)
    15 June 2018 Public authority
    Anonymous (Netherlands)

    Contents: 1. Compliance status (b): partially compliant 2. Question about the use of the words ‘conformity’ and ‘compliance’ 3. Reference to Article 2(6) of Directive 2003/98/EC 1. Compliance status (b): partially compliant The way compliance status (b) currently is formulated does not set it sufficiently apart from compliance status (c). A likely scenario is that nearly all public sector bodies (PSBs) will opt for compliance status (b)....

All feedback (27) >