• Skip to main content
  • Skip to "About government"

Language switcher

  • Françaisfr
Government of Canada / Gouvernement du Canada

Search Accessbility Standards Canada


Use the Left and Right arrow keys to navigate between the top level menu items. Press the ENTER key or double tap the SPACEBAR to select a menu item. To navigate through a sub menu, Press the SPACEBAR or the Down arrow key. Use the Up and Down arrow keys to navigate through submenu items. Press the Enter or SPACEBAR to select a submenu item. Press the ESCAPE key to close the submenu and return to the top level.

Main navigation

  • Home
    • About us
    • Accessibility Plan
    • Get involved
    • Reports and publications
    • Transparency
    • Consultations
    • Organizational structure
  • Accessibility standards
    • Standards and technical guides database
    • Standards under public review
    • Technical committees
    • Work program
  • Funding research
    • Funded research project database
  • Centre of Expertise
  • Contact us
  • Login

Mobile Menu

  • Home
    • About us
    • Accessibility Plan
    • Get involved
    • Reports and publications
    • Transparency
    • Consultations
    • Organizational structure
  • Accessibility standards
    • Standards and technical guides database
    • Standards under public review
    • Technical committees
    • Work program
  • Funding research
    • Funded research project database
  • Centre of Expertise
  • Contact us
  • Login

You are here

  1. Canada.ca
  2. Accessibility Standards Canada
  3. Search results

Search results


Displaying 571 - 580 of 729

Individual 64962's submission

CAN-ASC-2.4 – Wayfinding and Signage
Feedback items
Item id
1774126348924_211
Heading id
heading-34
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Discuss selecting fixtures that do not flicker, or have LED, which can cause discomfort to some users.
What should we change it to?
"Select fixtures that do not flicker, or have LED, which can cause discomfort to some users." (I have limited knowledge in this area, but do have living experience with sensitivity to many fixtures.)
Why should we change it?
Important to alert readers to this being an impactful feature on many users.
Heading text
10.1.4.2 Indoor light fixtures
Heading number portion
10.1.4.2
Item id
1774126619205_319
Heading id
s10.2.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
"meet the minimum luminance contrast values as those in Table 1 (for requirements for glossy or shiny materials see Clause 10.2.2 and Table 2)." currently has "1" and "2" text with hyperlink to 'Table 1' and 'Table 2'
What should we change it to?
Add hyperlink to "Table 1" and "Table 2", rather than just "1" and "2".
Why should we change it?
If readers are using screen reading programs and scanning through by links, they will hear "1" and "2" which has less meaning than "Table 1" and "Table 2". This may occur in other instances in this document, but is only noted here.
Heading text
10.2.1 General requirements
Heading number portion
10.2.1
Item id
1774126766909_753
Heading id
s10.2.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
These are minimum contrast values, higher values are often used to improve the lighting conditions such as when the lighting conditions may at times be low.
What should we change it to?
These are minimum contrast values. Higher values are often used to improve the lighting conditions such as when the lighting conditions may at times be low.
Why should we change it?
By changing to two separate sentences, we very clearly state the minimum value, then go on in the next sentence to discuss higher values. More clear language and less cognitive load.
Heading text
10.2.1 General requirements
Heading number portion
10.2.1
Item id
1774127317783_13
Heading id
s11.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
provide supportive measures in combinations, i.e., audible and tactile; audible and visual;
What should we change it to?
provide supportive measures in combinations, (e.g., audible and tactile; audible and visual);
Why should we change it?
Careful of "i.e." versus "e.g." In most cases, it should be "e.g." which means 'some examples' whereas "e.g." means 'in other words', to clarify or rephrase a statement. There may be other instances in this document.
Heading text
11.1 General
Heading number portion
11.1
Item id
1774127395600_639
Heading id
heading-65
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
have a luminance-contrast of at least 50 % with the surrounding surface;
What should we change it to?
have a luminance-contrast of at least 50% with the surrounding surface;
Why should we change it?
No space before percentage sign, consistent with other instances in this document.
Heading text
11.4.3.2 Luminance contrast
Heading number portion
11.4.3.2
Item id
1774127474583_540
Heading id
s0
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
At least 30 % of these technical experts are people with disabilities and lived experience and 30% are from equity seeking groups including 2SLGBTQI+, indigenous peoples, women and visible minorities.
What should we change it to?
At least 30% of these technical experts are people with disabilities and lived experience and 30% are from equity seeking groups including 2SLGBTQI+, indigenous peoples, women and visible minorities.
Why should we change it?
No space before percentage sign, consistent with other instances in this document.
Heading text
1. Accessibility Standards Canada: About us
Heading number portion
1.
Item id
1774127817721_594
Heading id
heading-68
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
Note 1: In indoor settings with highly smooth surfaces, a height of at least 4 mm is recommended.
What should we change it to?
Note 1: In indoor settings with highly smooth surfaces, a height of at least 5 mm is recommended.
Why should we change it?
11.4.3.3.2 states that "Flat-topped elongated bars shall have a height between 4 mm and 5 mm." If note 1 is providing a recommended height for indoor settings with highly smooth surfaces, I would expect a recommended height that is higher than the minimum (which is 4 mm). Should this be higher? If not, why mention that we should have a recommended height that is the minimum?
Heading text
11.4.3.3.2 Height of bars
Heading number portion
11.4.3.3.2
Item id
1774127914496_383
Heading id
s11.4.3.3.4
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
A 17 mm top width is considered the most effective dimension for individuals to detect and differentiate using the soles of their shoes.
What should we change it to?
A 17 mm top width is considered the most effective dimension for individuals to detect and differentiate through the soles of their shoes.
Why should we change it?
Change "using" to "through." People don't use the soles of their shoes to detect, they use their feet through their soles. There is another instance of this, but it does say "through".
Heading text
11.4.3.3.4 Bar width
Heading number portion
11.4.3.3.4
Item id
1774128075393_950
Heading id
heading-54
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
Except when the location is protected by a guard complying with clause 6.16.4 of CAN-ASC-2.1 (draft), an attention indicator shall be at the following locations:
What should we change it to?
Except when the location is protected by a guard complying with Clause 6.16.4 of CAN-ASC-2.1 (draft), an attention indicator shall be at the following locations:
Why should we change it?
Capitalize "Clause", consistent with other instances in the document.
Heading text
11.4.2.2 Location
Heading number portion
11.4.2.2
Item id
1774128137346_646
Heading id
s12.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
have all audible and visual signs, including those provided for indoor or outdoor mapping tested by people who will use them to confirm usability and clarity; and
What should we change it to?
have all audible and visual signs, including those provided for indoor or outdoor mapping, tested by people who will use them to confirm usability and clarity; and
Why should we change it?
Add a comma after "mapping", since this is effectively a parenthetical addition to the phrase “have signs ... tested”
Heading text
12.1 General
Heading number portion
12.1
Item id
1774128248826_157
Heading id
s0
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
people with disabilities
What should we change it to?
persons with disabilities
Why should we change it?
Consider consistency of “people with disabilities” vs “persons with disabilities.” In most cases "persons with disabilities" will work gramatically, and tends to be more common and reflective of inclusive language than "people with disabilities."
Heading text
1. Accessibility Standards Canada: About us
Heading number portion
1.
Item id
1774128358178_248
Heading id
s12.2.2
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
Examples of Identification signs include signage for buildings, washrooms, egress, stairwells, doorways, or offices.
What should we change it to?
Examples of identification signs include signage for buildings, washrooms, egress, stairwells, doorways, or offices.
Why should we change it?
"identification" does not need to be capitalized in this context, and lowercase is consistent with 12.2.1 "Examples of orientation signs include..."
Heading text
12.2.2 Identification signs
Heading number portion
12.2.2
Item id
1774128424482_150
Heading id
s12.2.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
Examples specific to outdoor environments trailhead orientation panels, park entrance directories
What should we change it to?
Examples specific to outdoor environments include trailhead orientation panels, park entrance directories
Why should we change it?
Missing word "include", consistent with sentence structure in previous note "Examples of orientation signs include maps, sketches,..."
Heading text
12.2.1 Orientation Signs
Heading number portion
12.2.1
Item id
1774128574619_190
Heading id
s12.2.3
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
Note 1: Examples of prohibition signs include no entry sign, no stopping sign, no smoking sign, no open fires, no off-leash pets, no swimming. Note 2: Examples of mandatory signs include dismount bikes sign, keep right sign, keep clear sign, stay on marked trail.
What should we change it to?
Note 1: Examples of prohibition signs include no entry signs, no stopping signs, no smoking signs, no open fires, no off-leash pets, no swimming. Note 2: Examples of mandatory signs include dismount bikes signs, keep right signs, keep clear signs, stay on marked trail.
Why should we change it?
Pluralize signs, for grammatical consistency and consistency with examples listed in 12.2.2 (e.g., "Examples specific to outdoor environments campsite number signs, cabin or yurt identifiers, accessible beach or picnic shelter identification signs." However, do consider 12.2.4 that has singular. Either way, ensure consistency of singular or plural for sign(s) in these adjacent sections.
Heading text
12.2.3 Regulatory signs
Heading number portion
12.2.3
Item id
1774128632739_481
Heading id
s12.2.3
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
Regulatory signs that denote forbidden actions (Prohibition Signs), or a mandatory action (Mandatory Signs).
What should we change it to?
Regulatory signs that denote forbidden actions (Prohibition Signs), or a mandatory actions (Mandatory Signs).
Why should we change it?
Consistency of "forbidden actions" and "mandatory actions"
Heading text
12.2.3 Regulatory signs
Heading number portion
12.2.3
Item id
1774128988388_977
Heading id
s12.2.4
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
Note 2: Examples specific to outdoor environments wildlife warnings (e.g., bear in area), steep slope or falling rock alerts, trail closure due to flooding or storm damage.
What should we change it to?
Note 2: Examples include specific to outdoor environments wildlife warnings (e.g., bear in area), steep slope or falling rock alerts, trail closure due to flooding or storm damage.
Why should we change it?
Add "include"
Heading text
12.2.4 Warning and danger signs
Heading number portion
12.2.4
Item id
1774129060652_192
Heading id
s12.2.7
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
Refer to other sign types for signs that are not exclusively designed for motorists in a parking facility, such as signage designed for pedestrians.
What should we change it to?
(Add references to applicable sections of this document.)
Why should we change it?
Is this telling us to consider guidelines under a different section, and apply them to content in 12.2.7? If so, reference by number the section(s) and include the section name(s).
Heading text
12.2.7 Parking Signs
Heading number portion
12.2.7
Item id
1774129093388_651
Heading id
s12.2.8
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
identification signs
What should we change it to?
identification signs;
Why should we change it?
add semicolon after list item
Heading text
12.2.8 Requirements for different types of signage
Heading number portion
12.2.8
Item id
1774129208036_142
Heading id
s12.2.8
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
i. not create an obstruction within the path of travel; ii. when installed outdoors, be placed in a location that does not intrude into the path of travel; and
What should we change it to?
(see below)
Why should we change it?
These seem redundant. Are they saying something different? If so, suggest revising for clarity.
Heading text
12.2.8 Requirements for different types of signage
Heading number portion
12.2.8
Item id
1774129323605_282
Heading id
s12.2.8
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
at least 1000 mm long
What should we change it to?
"at least 1000 mm high" or "at least 1000 mm wide"
Why should we change it?
Is this the width or height of the painted symbol. The term “long” is unclear here.
Heading text
12.2.8 Requirements for different types of signage
Heading number portion
12.2.8
Item id
1774129363957_871
Heading id
s12.2.8
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
for digital or electronic signage ensure compliance with Clause 12.11,
What should we change it to?
for digital or electronic signage, ensure compliance with Clause 12.11,
Why should we change it?
Add comma for clarity.
Heading text
12.2.8 Requirements for different types of signage
Heading number portion
12.2.8
Item id
1774129444205_818
Heading id
s12.2.9
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
Trailhead signs in outdoor spaces shall be provided at the start of trails and wherever trail conditions change significantly and include:
What should we change it to?
Trailhead signs in outdoor spaces shall be provided at the start of trails and wherever trail conditions change significantly. They shall include:
Why should we change it?
Sentence is wordy and hard to read. Suggest separating into two sentences.
Heading text
12.2.9 Signs for outdoor spaces
Heading number portion
12.2.9
Item id
1774129510406_173
Heading id
s12.3
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
include alternative communication methods, i.e., an audible technology, braille booklet or similar alternate format where there is an established need.
What should we change it to?
include alternative communication methods, (e.g., an audible technology, braille booklet or similar alternate format where there is an established need).
Why should we change it?
Add parentheses for example. Use "e.g." rather than "i.e."
Heading text
12.3 Quality of information
Heading number portion
12.3
Item id
1774129701790_988
Heading id
s12.3
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
Motion sensors or QR codes that trigger an audio recording of the information and other technologies that automatically read aloud text are examples of valid options that may be used.
What should we change it to?
Valid options that may be used include motion sensors or QR codes that trigger an audio recording of the information, and other technologies that automatically read aloud text.
Why should we change it?
Long sentence is hard to read and not in plain language. Start by telling the reader what these things are (the 'valid options') then go on to list them, rather than stating that they are valid options at the end.
Heading text
12.3 Quality of information
Heading number portion
12.3
Item id
1774129857527_785
Heading id
s12.6.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
for signs meant to be read looking down (i.e., mounted on a standalone pole either parallel or angled to the ground), be located between 730 mm to 860 mm above the ground to allow viewing from a seated position;
What should we change it to?
for signs meant to be read looking down (i.e., mounted on a standalone pole either parallel or angled to the ground), be located between with the bottom edge 730 mm to 860 mm above the ground to allow viewing from a seated position;
Why should we change it?
I imagine this is an angled, but generally horizontal sign. Could be helpful to indicate which part of the sign is measured between 730 mm and 860 mm.
Heading text
12.6.1 Location of signs
Heading number portion
12.6.1
Item id
1774129985879_619
Heading id
s12.6.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
be mounted on the exterior wall beside the entrance door, where feasible.
What should we change it to?
be mounted on the exterior wall beside latch edge of the entrance door, where feasible.
Why should we change it?
Specify latch edge, consistent with CSA B651:23 4.6.6.4 a)
Heading text
12.6.1 Location of signs
Heading number portion
12.6.1
Item id
1774130209041_346
Heading id
s12.7.2
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
add mounting height
What should we change it to?
add mounting height
Why should we change it?
I would consider mounting height to be part of location. Even if it is also located elsewhere, readers may come to here to find the height. Could include a reference to the reference (elsewhere) to mounting height, but should also list it here.
Heading text
12.7.2 Tactile signs at doors—location and mounting
Heading number portion
12.7.2
Item id
1774130460073_286
Heading id
s12.6.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
Change the order of sections a-k.
What should we change it to?
Start with the most prevalent, pertinent information first, such as d-e-c-a-... then place b (outdoor toilet facilities) later.
Why should we change it?
Following plain language principles, put the most important information first. The first time I read this section, I saw 'signs meant to be read looking down' followed by 'for outdoor toilet facilities' and I felt like these were reasonably niche and uncommon applications and didn't expect to find more broad-reaching specs such as general mounting height, etc.
Heading text
12.6.1 Location of signs
Heading number portion
12.6.1
Item id
1774130694761_650
Heading id
s12.6.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
e. be installed at a height of 1150 mm to 1250 mm above the floor for those required to include tactile and braille elements
What should we change it to?
Specify either centreline or bottom edge, check numbers (see below).
Why should we change it?
CSA B651:23 4.6.6.4 e) states that tactile signs “be mounted with the horizontal centreline 1500±25m from the floor. " This height appears to be different, and suggest specifying whether this measurement is horizontal centreline or bottom edge of sign.
Heading text
12.6.1 Location of signs
Heading number portion
12.6.1
Item id
1774130796794_577
Heading id
s12.6.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
d. be located 1500 mm +/- 50 mm from the floor when they are visual and do not contain tactile or braille elements; e. be installed at a height of 1150 mm to 1250 mm above the floor for those required to include tactile and braille elements
What should we change it to?
d. be located 1500 mm +/- 50 mm from the floor when they are visual and do not contain tactile or braille elements; e. be installed at a height of 1150 mm to 1250 mm above the floor for those containing tactile and braille elements
Why should we change it?
One mentions “when they are visual and do not contain tactile or braille elements.” The other mentions “...for those required to include tactile and braille elements.” Suggest changing the second to “...for those containing...”
Heading text
12.6.1 Location of signs
Heading number portion
12.6.1
Item id
1774130844786_636
Heading id
s12.6.2
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
2,050 mm
What should we change it to?
2050 mm
Why should we change it?
Remove comma within number, consistent with other larger numbers in this document.
Heading text
12.6.2 Overhead signs
Heading number portion
12.6.2
Item id
1774131021515_847
Heading id
s12.6.2
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
c. be mounted at consistent locations throughout the building and be viewable from a comfortable viewing distance; and
What should we change it to?
c. be mounted at consistent locations throughout the building and be viewable from a comfortable viewing distance (with font size in accordance with 12.4 n) v) ; and
Why should we change it?
Emphasize that font size is part of the sign being viewable from a comfortable viewing distance, and point people to reference within the document.
Heading text
12.6.2 Overhead signs
Heading number portion
12.6.2
Item id
1774131153188_386
Heading id
s12.6.3
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
Floor numbers should be displayed on each level at both the top and bottom of staircases, as well as on handrails.
What should we change it to?
Suggest providing details on placement. For example, BLC guidelines indicate “Placement on handrails: Only place braille on handrails if the floor surface is flat to allow for safe standing while reading. This means handrails on stairs should have extensions where braille and tactile print can be placed. It is recommended that the handrail extensions should be at least 300mm in length on both ends of the staircase.”
Why should we change it?
If signs are near doors, point people to where to read the specs for this. If readers are not aware that there are specifications on where to place on handrails (BLC), then they may place them in an unsafe location.
Heading text
12.6.3 Stairs
Heading number portion
12.6.3
Item id
1774131247259_6
Heading id
s12.6.3
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
Information signs should be placed in stairwells to identify all entry and exit points.
What should we change it to?
Specify where to place signs.
Why should we change it?
If specific locations, or reference to requirements within the document, are not in this section, users may not consider the best placement of these signs.
Heading text
12.6.3 Stairs
Heading number portion
12.6.3
Item id
1774131314532_417
Heading id
s12.7.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
b. be approachable within 100 mm without encountering protruding objects or standing within a door swing;
What should we change it to?
Move to 12.7.2 or 12.7.3 (see below)
Why should we change it?
This seems to be more of a placement feature, rather than feature of the sign itself. Suggest moving it to 12.7.2 and/or 12.7.3
Heading text
12.7.1 Tactile sign design and build elements
Heading number portion
12.7.1
Item id
1774131359868_899
Heading id
s12.7.4
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
ranging from 135 percent to a maximum of 170 percent of
What should we change it to?
ranging from 135 % to a maximum of 170 % of
Why should we change it?
Change “percent” to “%” for consistency within document.
Heading text
12.7.4 Tactile characters
Heading number portion
12.7.4
Item id
1774131416516_669
Heading id
s12.8
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
Poor material can lead to dots wearing off, changing the letters and affecting the meaning of the braille message.
What should we change it to?
Poor material can lead to dots wearing off, changing the characters and affecting the meaning of the braille message.
Why should we change it?
Change “letters” to “characters.” While each braille cell may contain an individual letter, it is more accurately called a “character,” especially if numbers or contracted braille are involved.
Heading text
12.8 Braille
Heading number portion
12.8
Item id
1774131492972_34
Heading id
s12.9
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
1. the field to have a minimum height of 150 mm and be raised 0.8 mm – 1.5 mm from the surrounding surface; and 2. the symbol positioned on the field at 0.8-1.5 mm from the surface of the field;
What should we change it to?
1. the field to have a minimum height of 150 mm and be raised 0.8 mm – 1.5 mm from the surrounding surface; and 2. the symbol positioned on the field at 0.8 mm – 1.5 mm from the surface of the field;
Why should we change it?
Consistency of "mm" and hyphen spacing.
Heading text
12.9 Pictograms and graphical symbols
Heading number portion
12.9
Item id
1774131535324_613
Heading id
s12.10.5
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
if the doors are open or closed
What should we change it to?
if the doors are opening or closing
Why should we change it?
Is it more accurate to say “if the doors are opening or closing” as it is the action of the door moving that is pertinent to the user, than a static state?
Heading text
12.10.5 Elevators
Heading number portion
12.10.5
Item id
1774131592668_840
Heading id
s12.11.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
b. be tested by people with various abilities to find the right amount of time needed
What should we change it to?
Add ideal times (see below)
Why should we change it?
This is not very specific. Recommend referencing 12.11.7 b) that provides best viewing times.
Heading text
12.11.1 General
Heading number portion
12.11.1
Item id
1774131658468_111
Heading id
s13.10
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
Location plans shall:
What should we change it to?
Maps shall:
Why should we change it?
Not sure about the use of the term “locations plans” here. The 13.1 introduction states that “A wide range of map types, including location plans, guide maps, and navigation maps.” Are location plans just one kind of map? If so, perhaps define it somewhere. If 13.10 refers to construction and maintenance of all maps, then rename to “Maps shall”
Heading text
13.10 Construction and maintenance
Heading number portion
13.10
Item id
1774131710021_207
Heading id
s13
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
The measurement of slip resistance for TWSIs has been evolving
What should we change it to?
The measurement of slip resistance for Tactile Walking Surface Indicators (TWSIs) has been evolving
Why should we change it?
Suggest providing the “Tactile Walking Surface Indicator” before TWSIs, since they haven’t been mentioned for a while in the document.
Heading text
14. Annex A: Slip resistance measurement (informative)
Heading number portion
14.
Item id
1774131843686_157
Heading id
s15.2
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
Some items are not in alphabetical order.
What should we change it to?
Ensure items are in alphabetical order.
Why should we change it?
Ease of reference for readers.
Heading text
15.2 Standards and Codes
Heading number portion
15.2
Item id
1774131879278_254
Heading id
s15.3
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
Some items are not in alphabetical order.
What should we change it to?
Ensure items are in alphabetical order.
Why should we change it?
Ease of reference for readers.
Heading text
15.3 Online Resources
Heading number portion
15.3
Submission ID
64962
Submitted by
arielbirkinshaw@cunet.carleton.ca
Submitted on
Sat, 03/21/2026 - 18:25
Consent to contact
Yes

Individual 64973's submission

CAN-ASC-2.4 – Wayfinding and Signage
Feedback items
Item id
1774287717284_671
Heading id
s6.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
federal facilities
What should we change it to?
Federal and federally-regulated (obligated?) facilities
Why should we change it?
More clarification on who is applies to
Heading text
6.1 Background
Heading number portion
6.1
Item id
1774287895021_108
Heading id
s6.2
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Empowerment and independence: Wayfinding and signage in its various forms allow for autonomy and independent navigation, providing timely, accurate, and clear information in multiple formats when necessary.
What should we change it to?
Safety, Empowerment and independence: Wayfinding and signage in its various forms allow for safe, autonomous and independent navigation, providing timely, accurate, and clear information in multiple formats when necessary.
Why should we change it?
Safety is only mentioned regarding technologies, otherwise.
Heading text
6.2 Guiding principles
Heading number portion
6.2
Item id
1774288006551_929
Heading id
s7.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
This Standard focuses on the implementation of multiple solutions (e.g., sight, sound, tactile, and technology) to provide individuals with a variety of options to meet their needs and facilitate independent navigation.
What should we change it to?
Add safe: This Standard focuses on the implementation of multiple solutions (e.g., sight, sound, tactile, and technology) to provide individuals with a variety of options to meet their needs and facilitate safe and independent navigation.
Why should we change it?
Important to include as part of navigation
Heading text
7.1 General
Heading number portion
7.1
Item id
1774288118690_969
Heading id
s7.4
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
In section 6: other jurisdictions will be encouraged to adopt this standard and develop regulations to implement it.
What should we change it to?
Add definition for "will be" or change to "should", as a recommendation
Why should we change it?
Clarity
Heading text
7.4 Terminology
Heading number portion
7.4
Item id
1774288252659_592
Heading id
s9.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Note: Large print is considered to be 14 point or larger sans serif font.
What should we change it to?
18 point or larger
Why should we change it?
Consistent with CNIB Clear Print Guidelines. 14 pt. is quite small
Heading text
9.1 Definitions
Heading number portion
9.1
Item id
1774288746201_43
Heading id
s9
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
Cross reference Deaf Space principles to ensure fit within this section
What should we change it to?
https://pinelandsalliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Gallaudet-University-DeafSpace-Design-Guidelines.pdf
Why should we change it?
Ensure consistency
Heading text
10. General requirements for lighting and contrast
Heading number portion
10.
Item id
1774289026349_888
Heading id
s11.3
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
Define "busy pattern" somewhere in the standard
What should we change it to?
Give greater clarity on what that means
Why should we change it?
The term is used a few times but not referenced- is there a guideline?
Heading text
11.3 Walking surfaces of interior and exterior paths of travel
Heading number portion
11.3
Item id
1774289275112_914
Heading id
s11.3.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
a.ii.
What should we change it to?
Provide a measurement for "different levels" i.e. City of Ottawa half height curb for separation between pedestrian and cycle track is 50-75 mm
Why should we change it?
Provide a technical measurement for design clarity
Heading text
11.3.1 Additional specifications for exterior paths of travel
Heading number portion
11.3.1
Item id
1774289350248_339
Heading id
s11.3.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
b.ii.
What should we change it to?
See why
Why should we change it?
Does this prevent the design and construction of multi use pathways?
Heading text
11.3.1 Additional specifications for exterior paths of travel
Heading number portion
11.3.1
Item id
1774289456034_232
Heading id
s11.3.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
a.ii. and iii.
What should we change it to?
Provide clarity on the use and accessibility of pavers
Why should we change it?
Pavers create many accessibility barriers and should be discouraged.
Heading text
11.3.1 Additional specifications for exterior paths of travel
Heading number portion
11.3.1
Item id
1774290512583_852
Heading id
heading-53
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Add something on TWSI maintenance
What should we change it to?
Ensure TWSIs (particularly not cast materials) are replaced when worn. And maintained for detectability during winter months
Why should we change it?
Maintenance requirements
Heading text
11.4.2.1 General
Heading number portion
11.4.2.1
Item id
1774290555321_505
Heading id
heading-53
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Add something on temporary TWSIs
What should we change it to?
Temporary TWSIs can provide helpful navigation during construction
Why should we change it?
Another accessibility feature
Heading text
11.4.2.1 General
Heading number portion
11.4.2.1
Item id
1774290867203_865
Heading id
s12.3
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Note 1
What should we change it to?
When possible, signs should only contain a single language, as best practice
Why should we change it?
Easier to understand
Heading text
12.3 Quality of information
Heading number portion
12.3
Item id
1774291665556_954
Heading id
s12.11.7
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Grade 8 reading level
What should we change it to?
Seems high. What about supplementing with pictograms as well?
Why should we change it?
Is this the general population's reading level?
Heading text
12.11.7 Messaging
Heading number portion
12.11.7
Item id
1774291750910_366
Heading id
s12
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Add QR codes
What should we change it to?
Maps should include a QR code that provides information in alt formats
Why should we change it?
More accessible
Heading text
13. Maps (non-tactile)
Heading number portion
13.
Submission ID
64973
Submitted by
megan.richards@ottawa.ca
Submitted on
Mon, 03/23/2026 - 14:51
Consent to contact
Yes

Individual 64977's submission

CAN-ASC-2.4 – Wayfinding and Signage
Feedback items
Item id
1774368597482_26
Heading id
s6.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Sec. 2.3-Signage
What should we change it to?
• Lighting and glare requirements present practical challenges for real-world design and verification. • Standards are currently voluntary; there are no compliance checks at this stage. • • In the interim, specify these standards in procurement/contract documents for new builds and renovations. • Consider requesting third‑party verification as part of project delivery.
Why should we change it?
If adopted positively by ASC and its Board, requirements could be recommended for regulation and formal enforcement.
Heading text
6.1 Background
Heading number portion
6.1
Item id
1774372452860_225
Heading id
s12.3
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
• Lighting and glare requirements present practical challenges for real-world design and verification.
What should we change it to?
• Standards are currently voluntary; there are no compliance checks at this stage. • If adopted positively by ASC and its Board, requirements could be recommended for regulation and formal enforcement. • In the interim, specify these standards in procurement/contract documents for new builds and renovations.
Why should we change it?
• Consider requesting third‑party verification as part of project delivery
Heading text
12.3 Quality of information
Heading number portion
12.3
Item id
1774372710003_619
Heading id
s10.1.2
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
• Concern with lighting colour temperature (Section 10.1.2 general lighting design ): 3000 K is “warm” but may not be sufficiently warm for people with sensory sensitivities (e.g., autism, light sensitivity).
What should we change it to?
• Recommendation: allow/encourage adjustable lighting (tunable CCT and dimming) and specify quality metrics beyond CCT (e.g., CRI, spectral considerations). • Risk noted: tendency to increase brightness in darker contexts; emphasis should remain on quality of light rather than brightness alone. • Request a non‑digital option for wayfinding/signage to support users who cannot tolerate screens or motion content. • Question on outreach: ensure municipalities and other stakeholders are formally notified (communication plan, kits for directors, social media, newsletters). • Concern about lighting health impacts; confirm presence of lighting expertise within the Technical Committee (TC roster available online). • Outreach examples noted: articles targeting people with disabilities; goal is adoption across all levels of government. • Call to action: leverage networks to invite additional commenters; prior EE standard received 1,000+ comments demonstrating strong engagement. • Process reminder: how to submit comments (deadline mentioned: March 30).
Why should we change it?
• 3000 K alone is not a robust quality measure; Colour Rendering Index (CRI) and spectral distribution should be considered • In lived experience, 2700 K performs better for some users, though context matters
Heading text
10.1.2 General lighting design
Heading number portion
10.1.2
Item id
1774372802364_535
Heading id
s10.1.2
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
• For low‑vision users, ensure even illumination throughout circulation routes; avoid shadow patches and abrupt transitions.
What should we change it to?
• Position luminaires to minimize direct glare (keep sources out of eye line) and to illuminate floors and travel zones. • Daylight can cause sudden shifts (e.g., low sun angles at building west façades in fall); coordinate electric lighting to smooth transitions.
Why should we change it?
• Add tools/practical examples to support implementation (e.g., guidance on assessing uniformity and mitigating shadow bands).
Heading text
10.1.2 General lighting design
Heading number portion
10.1.2
Item id
1774372892957_74
Heading id
s12.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
• Signage (Section 12): define minimum font sizes and what “sufficient” means, even if synchronization across media is required
What should we change it to?
• Wayfinding: consider mandatory use of salient landmarks at major decision points (visual, tactile, and auditory) to support spatial memory. • Acknowledgement that the current draft may not include that level of detail. • Maps: include guidance for electronic/digital maps and portable (hand‑held) maps used during navigation.
Why should we change it?
• Observation that portable map guidance appears to be a gap; suggestion to add content in the relevant section and submit formal comments online.
Heading text
12.1 General
Heading number portion
12.1
Item id
1774372984451_453
Heading id
s11.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
• Visual needs
What should we change it to?
• Visual needs vary widely; distinguish clearly between minimum requirements and desirable best practices. • Practicality/feasibility will vary (costs and implementation constraints). • Elevator example: tactile indicators vs. visual/auditory cues—timing and light signals matter, especially for Deaf users needing visual cues. • Consider leveraging current technologies (e.g., smart/seasonally adjustable lighting) to achieve intent.
Why should we change it?
• Always validate with people with disabilities; requirements are task‑ and context‑dependent.
Heading text
11.1 General
Heading number portion
11.1
Submission ID
64977
Submitted by
VWilliams
Submitted on
Mon, 03/30/2026 - 14:21
Consent to contact
Yes

Individual 64980's submission

CAN-ASC-2.4 – Wayfinding and Signage
Feedback items
Item id
1774385942146_141
Heading id
s11.3.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
I think it would be helpful, particularly for people with low vision (like me), to add something to require the use of non-waterbased paint for exterior use on paved surfaces, crosswalks, zones, etc.
What should we change it to?
To use external marking paint that meets certain standards for how long it remains in outdoor environments so it doesn't wear off prematurely from wet weather and normal traffic (foot/car/bike).
Why should we change it?
The trend to environmentally friendly marking paint has resulted in wayfinding, parking lot, crosswalk, and other types of markings being completely or almost completely worn off prematurely. They often remain this way for long periods due to inadequate repainting schedules (likely still on a schedule for the previous types of paint, which would remain relatively intact for years).
Heading text
11.3.1 Additional specifications for exterior paths of travel
Heading number portion
11.3.1
Submission ID
64980
Submitted by
kixi@live.be
Submitted on
Tue, 03/24/2026 - 17:01
Consent to contact
Yes

Individual 65000's submission

CAN-ASC-2.9 – Accessible Childcare Centres
Feedback items
Item id
1774473230946_708
Heading id
s0
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
The language used throughout this section is deficit-based, focusing on “impairment,” “functional limitation,” and barriers arising from disability. From our perspective, this framing does not fully reflect current best practices in inclusive and neurodiversity-affirming language, particularly in early childhood contexts. Increasingly, organizations, educators, and families are shifting toward strengths-based approaches that recognize neurological and developmental differences as part of human diversity, rather than solely as impairments.
What should we change it to?
We recommend maintaining alignment with the Accessible Canada Act definition of disability, while supplementing it with strengths-based, inclusive language that reflects evolving best practices. Suggested addition: “While disability is defined in accordance with the Accessible Canada Act, Accessibility Standards Canada recognizes that children and individuals may also identify using strengths-based language, including neurodiversity and other affirming terms. This includes children with visible and invisible disabilities, whose needs may not be immediately apparent but are equally important to recognize and support. Accessibility efforts should respect and reflect diverse ways of understanding and describing human differences.”
Why should we change it?
Language shapes how standards are interpreted and applied. In early childhood settings, deficit-based language can reinforce stigma. A simple addition allows the standard to stay legally aligned while reflecting current, inclusive practice and how families actually talk about and to their children.
Heading text
1. Accessibility Standards Canada: About us
Heading number portion
1.
Item id
1774473273214_620
Heading id
s6.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
The section outlines where and how the standard applies, but it reads as fairly rigid. It does not acknowledge that childcare settings vary significantly (e.g., size, location, type of operator), which can impact how requirements are realistically implemented.
What should we change it to?
You could add language such as: “This standard is intended to be applied across a range of childcare settings, and implementation should consider differences in scale, location, and available resources while maintaining the intent of accessibility.”
Why should we change it?
Without this, there’s a risk of inconsistent or impractical application, especially in smaller or rural settings. Acknowledging variability upfront supports better adoption while still keeping the accessibility goals intact.
Heading text
6.1 Importance of accessibility in childcare centres
Heading number portion
6.1
Item id
1774473314539_628
Heading id
s6.2
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
The section highlights design strategies like reducing overstimulation and providing sensory spaces, but it focuses on the physical environment. It does not acknowledge that group size and staffing ratios are also a key part of accessible design in practice.
What should we change it to?
Add a short statement recognizing the role of group size and staffing. For example: “Accessible design in childcare centres should also consider group size and staffing ratios, as these directly impact a child’s ability to regulate, participate, and receive appropriate support, particularly for children with invisible disabilities such as sensory sensitivities, communication differences, or attention-related needs.” One policy idea would be to assign weighted ratios based on the needs of children within the group and their support needs.
Why should we change it?
Even with strong physical design, large group sizes can make environments overwhelming and inaccessible for many children. In practice, staffing and ratios are just as important as space design in reducing overstimulation and supporting participation. Without acknowledging this, the section feels incomplete.
Heading text
6.2 Overview of accessible design in childcare centres
Heading number portion
6.2
Item id
1774473355630_882
Heading id
s7.3
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
The section references “relevant authorities having jurisdiction” without clearly defining who that includes or how consistency will be ensured across jurisdictions.
What should we change it to?
Define who the authorities are and also set out expectations of equitable access across the country. I.e.: “For the purposes of this standard, ‘authorities having jurisdiction’ should be clearly defined and applied consistently across provinces and territories.” And/or: “Implementation should aim for consistent expectations across jurisdictions to support equitable access to accessible childcare in Canada.”
Why should we change it?
As written, this leaves too much room for variation. If different jurisdictions interpret or apply the standard differently, accessibility will not be consistent across the country. That creates inequity for families depending on where they live, which runs counter to the intent of a national standard.
Heading text
7.3 Applications
Heading number portion
7.3
Item id
1774473398637_239
Heading id
s7.4
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
The section outlines implementation expectations but does not address workforce capacity, particularly in rural and remote areas. There is no mention of how centres will access trained staff or whether training supports will be available for existing employees.
What should we change it to?
Add a short statement such as: “Implementation should consider workforce capacity, including access to trained staff in rural and remote areas. Consideration should be given to training and other supports to enable consistent application of this standard.”
Why should we change it?
Without addressing staffing and training, implementation will vary significantly by location. Centres in urban areas may be able to meet expectations, while rural and remote centres may not. That creates inequitable access to accessible childcare based on geography, which undermines the intent of the standard.
Heading text
7.4 Limits
Heading number portion
7.4
Item id
1774473438405_995
Heading id
15.3
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
The section focuses on reducing noise levels and improving acoustics, but it treats this primarily as a comfort issue rather than an accessibility requirement tied to participation and regulation.
What should we change it to?
Add a short clarification such as: “Acoustic design should support children’s ability to regulate, communicate, and participate in programming, particularly for those who are sensitive to noise or auditory input.”
Why should we change it?
For many neurodiverse children, noise is not just uncomfortable, it's a barrier to participation. Framing acoustics as an accessibility requirement, not just a design feature, helps ensure it is prioritized appropriately in implementation.
Heading text
15.3 Acoustic design
Heading number portion
15.3
Item id
1774473619389_491
Heading id
s0
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
This is feedback on the overall standard - there was nowhere to add it at the end. The standard focuses on physical and environmental design but does not clearly address how individual needs will be consistently understood and supported across staff, settings, and transitions. There is also limited reference to staff training in neurodiversity and how that training connects to day-to-day implementation.
What should we change it to?
Add language such as: “Implementation of this standard should include staff training on a range of neurodiverse profiles and support needs, as well as tools to document and communicate individual accessibility requirements.” In addition, consideration should be given to structured tools that support consistency across staff. Horizon Education Foundation is developing a Canada Student Support Plan (CSSP) prototype document embedded in its National Education Framework initiative, which outlines key information such as student strengths, communication preferences, sensory sensitivities, triggers and effective supports. “The use of individualized child profiles (e.g., a ‘child passport’) can support continuity across staff, reduce reliance on informal knowledge, and improve consistency in how accessibility supports are applied.” In practice, accessibility often breaks down due to inconsistency. Families are required to repeatedly explain their child’s needs, and supports vary depending on staffing. Standardizing both training and how information is captured and shared improves consistency, reduces gaps in care, and leads to better outcomes for children. Tools like the Student Passport provide a practical way to operationalize accessibility beyond the physical environment and ensure that supports are actually implemented day to day.
Why should we change it?
Accessibility in practice depends not only on physical design, but on how consistently individual needs are understood and supported across staff, settings, and daily interactions. Without clear expectations for training and information-sharing, implementation becomes inconsistent and dependent on individual staff knowledge or experience. This is particularly important for children with invisible disabilities, whose needs may not be immediately apparent but can significantly impact their ability to participate, regulate, and communicate within childcare environments. Without structured approaches, these needs are more likely to be overlooked or inconsistently supported. Currently, families often carry the burden of repeatedly explaining their child’s needs, and supports can vary depending on staffing, transitions, or setting. This creates gaps in care and undermines the intent of accessibility. By embedding requirements for staff training and standardized tools to document and communicate individual needs, the standard can move beyond physical accessibility and ensure that supports are applied consistently in practice. This leads to more equitable, predictable, and effective outcomes for all children.
Heading text
1. Accessibility Standards Canada: About us
Heading number portion
1.
Submission ID
65000
Submitted by
Romy@horizoned.ca
Submitted on
Wed, 03/25/2026 - 17:20
Consent to contact
Yes

Individual 65010's submission

CAN-ASC-2.4 – Wayfinding and Signage
Feedback items
Item id
1774544435446_220
Heading id
s6.2
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
i. Empowerment and independence: Wayfinding and signage in its various forms allow for autonomy and independent navigation, providing timely, accurate, and clear information in multiple formats when necessary.
What should we change it to?
Empowerment and independence: Wayfinding and signage in its various forms allow for autonomy and independent navigation, providing timely, accurate, and clear information in multiple formats when necessary, without the need for human assistance.
Why should we change it?
The additional language will further emphasize and reinforce that the fullest level of autonomy and independence is only achieved when individuals can access information and navigate spaces without the need for human or staff assistance. While human assistance must always be available where possible, solutions that rely upon it do not reflect true independence and autonomy for individuals with disabilities.
Heading text
6.2 Guiding principles
Heading number portion
6.2
Item id
1774544607082_37
Heading id
s6.2
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
k. User consultation: Implementers and designers carry out consultation with user groups when establishing/determining or altering the wayfinding and signage solutions.
What should we change it to?
k. User consultation: Implementers and designers carry out consultation and user testing with user groups representing a diversity of lived disability experiences and communication methods when establishing/determining or altering the wayfinding and signage solutions. Individuals with lived experience must be meaningfully engaged throughout projects from the outset, including design, testing, implementation, and evaluation phases.
Why should we change it?
Wayfinding and signage systems are most effective when they are designed with, not just for, people with disabilities. Multi-sensory design and user testing improve safety, predictability, and independence. Ensuring the robust inclusion of persons with disabilities for consultation and user testing throughout project development, implementation, and evaluation will better ensure solutions that reflect a diversity of lived experiences and the broader public benefit of accessible design.
Heading text
6.2 Guiding principles
Heading number portion
6.2
Item id
1774544671306_233
Heading id
s6.2
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
In all aspects of wayfinding and signage, the following principles apply: …
What should we change it to?
Include an additional principle (i.e., subsection 6.2.l) stating that regulated entities shall aim for the highest level of accessibility and usability possible, rather than minimum requirements for technical compliance.
Why should we change it?
This additional principle will support the development of innovative solutions that support the advancement and mainstreaming of robust approaches to accessibility, as well as ensuring regulated entities strive for the highest achievable level of accessibility and inclusion.
Heading text
6.2 Guiding principles
Heading number portion
6.2
Item id
1774544751976_591
Heading id
s10.1.2
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
b. consider the following: … iii. consistency and dispersion of luminance…
What should we change it to?
iii. consistency and dispersion of luminance throughout interior and exterior spaces and along paths of travel.
Why should we change it?
The additional language reinforces the need to consider lighting factors throughout the relevant environment which may impact the visibility and usability of wayfinding and signage features, rather than focusing only on considerations for lighting in the immediate vicinity of the feature.
Heading text
10.1.2 General lighting design
Heading number portion
10.1.2
Item id
1774544915714_930
Heading id
heading-29
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Lighting design shall… d. incorporate supplementary lighting, with upward or downward components only, to enhance: i. special features and key orientation elements; ii. key signage and orientation landmarks; and iii. communication or information systems.
What should we change it to?
Add language clarifying that supplementary lighting must be maintained across key environmental elements such as doors, stairs, handrails, elevators, and decision points, as well as supporting the visibility of architectural and navigational cues.
Why should we change it?
The additional language provides greater clarity around the meaning of “special features and key orientation elements” to generate a more consistent understanding for regulated entities.
Heading text
10.1.2.1 Basic lighting considerations
Heading number portion
10.1.2.1
Item id
1774544995465_346
Heading id
heading-31
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Designers should prevent glare and shadow by: …
What should we change it to?
Designers shall prevent glare and shadow by: … and include an additional point specifying that light sources should not be partially or fully obstructed, as this can create shadows on the illuminated target and reduce visibility.
Why should we change it?
Lighting directly affects the ability of people with low vision to orient themselves, detect hazards, and identify key features in the environment. Inconsistent lighting and glare can significantly reduce usability and safety even when other accessibility features are present. Accordingly, reducing glare and shadow must be a requirement of the Standard, rather than a recommendation. In addition, obstructed light sources can unintentionally create shadows that reduce visibility and clarity of important features such as signage or pathways. Including this requirement ensures that lighting design supports consistent visibility and reduces barriers for individuals with low vision.
Heading text
10.1.3.1 Preventing glare and shadow
Heading number portion
10.1.3.1
Item id
1774545094490_59
Heading id
s11.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
b. provide supportive measures in combinations, i.e., audible and tactile; audible and visual …
What should we change it to?
Revise subsection (b) to state that wayfinding systems shall provide supportive measures that include audible, visual, and tactile features together, rather than in partial combinations, wherever possible.
Why should we change it?
The current wording suggests that combinations of two communication methods may be sufficient. This may result in minimum compliance approaches where only two formats are provided, even when it is feasible to include all three. Wayfinding is most effective when users can rely on multiple sources of information simultaneously. Requiring the inclusion of audible, visual, and tactile features ensures a more consistent, inclusive, and user-centered approach that supports a broader range of needs and abilities.
Heading text
11.1 General
Heading number portion
11.1
Item id
1774545157302_638
Heading id
s11.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Wayfinding shall: (subsections [a] through [f])
What should we change it to?
Include an additional subsection (i.e., 11.1.g) stating the need to ensure wayfinding systems should be applied consistently across buildings and facilities to improve predictability.
Why should we change it?
While the Standard mentions the need for consistent and predictable implementation of wayfinding and signage solutions in other sections, it should be highlighted under section 11.1 to emphasize this point and ensure it is recognized as a key principle for effective solutions.
Heading text
11.1 General
Heading number portion
11.1
Item id
1774545233938_615
Heading id
s11.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Wayfinding shall: (subsections [a] through [f])
What should we change it to?
Include an additional subsection (i.e., 11.1.h) stating that the design of wayfinding solutions must consider the spatial needs of guide dog users, persons travelling with guides, and those communicating side-by-side using sign language.
Why should we change it?
Spatial considerations are key to designing effective wayfinding solutions that meet the travel needs of persons with diverse disabilities and communication methods.
Heading text
11.1 General
Heading number portion
11.1
Item id
1774545286788_833
Heading id
s11.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Wayfinding shall: … e. have detectable paths of travel with visual contrast against adjacent walls to facilitate navigation in large or highly complex buildings and extensive areas …
What should we change it to?
Revise the wording to reflect that detectable paths of travel should include visual contrast in all cases, with particular consideration required for highly complex buildings and extensive areas.
Why should we change it?
While complex and/or extensive areas may necessitate more robust consideration and solutions for visual contrast to detect paths of travel, there should be consideration given to this matter in all cases.
Heading text
11.1 General
Heading number portion
11.1
Item id
1774545418483_271
Heading id
s11.2
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Note: Where protruding objects cannot be removed, they should be placed outside paths of travel or recessed so as not to reduce the width required for unobstructed passage for all persons.
What should we change it to?
Revise the note to include a requirement that protruding objects must also be cane-detectable where they cannot be removed or recessed.
Why should we change it?
Protruding objects that are not cane-detectable can pose significant safety risks for individuals who are blind or partially sighted. Including cane detectability ensures that hazards can be identified safely and supports independent navigation.
Heading text
11.2 Obstacles
Heading number portion
11.2
Item id
1774545473798_833
Heading id
s11.2.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Paths of travel shall: … d./e. have maintenance plans with provisions for the clearing and repair of all wayfinding and signage elements that are part of the space.
What should we change it to?
d./e. have maintenance plans with provisions for the clearing and repair of all wayfinding and signage elements that are part of the space, ensuring accessible routes and wayfinding elements remain available, consistent, and detectable at all times for all users, including white cane users and guide dog handlers.
Why should we change it?
This strengthens the requirement by ensuring continuous maintenance so routes remain accessible and unobstructed. People who are blind or partially sighted are particularly impacted by inconsistent or non-detectable obstacles, which can affect safety and independent navigation.
Heading text
11.2.1 Obstacles on paths of travel
Heading number portion
11.2.1
Item id
1774545535165_465
Heading id
s11.3
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
a) support orientation and wayfinding at critical navigation points through additional illumination, increased visual contrast, and tactile elements, such as material changes (textural changes) or TWSI.
What should we change it to?
Include an additional requirement specifying that information about the meaning of textural changes or tactile elements should be made available in accessible formats (e.g., website, accessibility page, or other communication methods).
Why should we change it?
Textural changes are often used to convey important wayfinding information, but their meaning may not be clearly understood by all users. Providing accessible information about what these elements represent improves usability and ensures individuals can interpret navigation cues effectively.
Heading text
11.3 Walking surfaces of interior and exterior paths of travel
Heading number portion
11.3
Item id
1774545631450_594
Heading id
s11.4
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
11.4 Tactile Walking Surface Indicator (TWSI)
What should we change it to?
Revise the introduction to include clear definitions of TWSIs and the different types (e.g., attention and directional indicators), including their purpose and use.
Why should we change it?
The current introduction lacks clear definitions, which may reduce understanding and consistent application. Providing definitions at the outset improves clarity and supports correct implementation. Additional guidance can be found in CNIB’s Clearing Our Path resource.
Heading text
11.4 Tactile Walking Surface Indicator (TWSI)
Heading number portion
11.4
Item id
1774545704766_225
Heading id
heading-50
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
TWSIs shall: (subsections [a] through [e])
What should we change it to?
Include an additional subsection (i.e., subsection 11.4.1.1.f) specifying that TWSI design and implementation must involve user testing with persons who are blind, Deafblind, or have low vision, including white cane users, to ensure effectiveness and usability.
Why should we change it?
TWSIs are one of the most important non-visual navigation tools available in the built environment. Their effectiveness depends on consistency and correct application. User testing with individuals who have lived experience must be a standard component of TWSI implementation to ensure proper design and placement.
Heading text
11.4.1.1 General requirements
Heading number portion
11.4.1.1
Item id
1774545769481_440
Heading id
heading-51
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
b) ensure clear differentiation between direction and attention indicators for individuals who rely on them for navigation;
What should we change it to?
Include additional guidance referencing standardized definitions, layouts, and detection methods for different TWSI types to support consistent application.
Why should we change it?
Clear differentiation is critical, but additional guidance is needed to ensure consistent understanding and implementation. Providing more detailed reference material supports effective navigation and reduces confusion.
Heading text
11.4.1.2 TWSI detection
Heading number portion
11.4.1.2
Item id
1774545853441_630
Heading id
s11.4.2
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Note: When installed at the bottom of a ramp ensure that a proper setback is used so that wheeled mobility device users are not destabilized at the bottom of the ramp but detection of the ramp is still possible for other users requiring the warning.
What should we change it to?
Revise the note to clarify placement requirements and ensure consistency with the primary requirement that TWSIs are installed at the top of stairs and ramps.
Why should we change it?
The current note may create confusion regarding placement expectations. Clarifying this requirement will support consistent application and reduce misinterpretation.
Heading text
11.4.2 Attention indicator surfaces
Heading number portion
11.4.2
Item id
1774545919228_889
Heading id
heading-55
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
b) be positioned 300 mm from the sidewalk edge when indicating a pedestrian crossing; d) be positioned 300 mm away from the curb edge when used to mark at-grade curbs separating sidewalks from vehicle lanes;
What should we change it to?
Revise the setback distance from 300 mm to 150–200 mm, consistent with CNIB Clearing Our Path recommendations.
Why should we change it?
A larger setback distance may increase crossing time and create safety risks. A reduced distance improves efficiency and safety while maintaining detectability.
Heading text
11.4.2.3 Placement
Heading number portion
11.4.2.3
Item id
1774546008510_608
Heading id
heading-65
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Note: Direction indicators are not yellow to differentiate from attention indicators.
What should we change it to?
Revise the note to provide clearer guidance on colour differentiation, including recommended colour use for each type of TWSI to support consistency.
Why should we change it?
The current note assumes attention indicators are always yellow, which may not be consistent across environments. Providing clearer guidance or recommended colour standards improves consistency and usability.
Heading text
11.4.3.2 Luminance contrast
Heading number portion
11.4.3.2
Item id
1774546062605_411
Heading id
s12.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Signage shall: … c. include tactile text, graphical symbols, pictograms, and braille when installed within lateral reach or frontal reach…
What should we change it to?
c. be installed within lateral reach or frontal reach wherever possible, and when installed within lateral or frontal reach shall include tactile text, graphical symbols, pictograms, and braille.
Why should we change it?
Placing signage within lateral and/or frontal reach should be considered standard whenever the space permits to maximize the availability of tactile text and braille, as well as make it easier to read for individuals with a shorter depth of vision.
Heading text
12.1 General
Heading number portion
12.1
Item id
1774546109525_908
Heading id
s12.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Signage shall: (subsections [a] through [i])
What should we change it to?
Include an additional subsection (i.e., subsection 12.1.j) specifying that signage should incorporate multiple communication systems (e.g., audible, visual, tactile) whenever possible, and that alternatives for signage should be made available where possible.
Why should we change it?
Providing options that enable a broader range of individuals to access and interpret signage should always be considered and implemented to the greatest extent possible for maximum accessibility. As digital wayfinding solutions (e.g., wayfinding apps specific to certain buildings or locations) become more common, these options should be provided when available.
Heading text
12.1 General
Heading number portion
12.1
Item id
1774546155557_453
Heading id
s12.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Signage shall: (subsections [a] through [i])
What should we change it to?
Include an additional subsection (i.e., subsection 12.1.k) specifying that effective signage should support independent navigation without the need for human or staff assistance.
Why should we change it?
While accessible customer service and assistance is essential to ensure safety and accessibility, there should be an expectation that effective signage is designed such that individuals with disabilities can access information and navigate spaces without needing to rely on others. This additional language will further underscore the overarching objective of making spaces fully inclusive and accessible for everyone regardless of their communication and/or wayfinding methods.
Heading text
12.1 General
Heading number portion
12.1
Item id
1774546220318_486
Heading id
s12.2.6
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Note 2: Signs not related to safety, wayfinding, or essential access, such as decorative displays or informal community notices (e.g. bake sales), should follow best practices for legibility and placement, but accessibility requirements are not mandatory.
What should we change it to?
Revise the note to clarify that where accessibility requirements are not applied, alternative accessible methods (e.g., staff or volunteer assistance) must be provided to ensure access to information.
Why should we change it?
Excluding certain signage from accessibility requirements may limit access to information for individuals with sight loss. Providing alternative access ensures inclusivity and aligns with accessibility principles.
Heading text
12.2.6 Temporary signs
Heading number portion
12.2.6
Item id
1774546281469_785
Heading id
s12.3
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Information provided by signs shall: a) be clear, concise, and use plain language; b) use familiar words, symbols, and formats; and c) be provided in alternative formats where required.
What should we change it to?
Include an additional subsection (i.e., subsection 12.3.d) specifying that signage should include a QR code, website link, or contact information (preferably a phone number) to access additional information in accessible formats.
Why should we change it?
Providing access to additional information through accessible channels supports individuals who may require more detailed or alternative formats. Including a phone number ensures access for individuals who may not use digital tools.
Heading text
12.3 Quality of information
Heading number portion
12.3
Item id
1774546362990_664
Heading id
s12.3
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Information provided by signs shall: a) be clear, concise, and use plain language; b) use familiar words, symbols, and formats; and c) be provided in alternative formats where required.
What should we change it to?
Include an additional subsection (i.e., subsection 12.3.d) specifying that information provided by signs should be validated through user testing with persons with disabilities, including individuals who are blind, partially sighted, and Deafblind, to ensure clarity, comprehension, and usability.
Why should we change it?
While the current requirements emphasize plain language and alternative formats, they do not explicitly require validation through real-world user testing. Testing with persons with disabilities helps ensure that information is not only technically accessible but also meaningful, understandable, and usable in practice. This aligns with the principle of “nothing without us” and supports more effective and inclusive wayfinding systems.
Heading text
12.3 Quality of information
Heading number portion
12.3
Item id
1774546435997_934
Heading id
s12.7
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
12.7.1 Tactile sign design and build elements Tactile signs shall: a) include raised characters; b) include braille; c) use high contrast between characters and background; d) use non-glare finishes; and e) be designed and constructed to be durable.
What should we change it to?
Include an additional requirement specifying that tactile signage should be regularly inspected and maintained to ensure that tactile elements (e.g., raised text and braille) remain legible, intact, and effective over time.
Why should we change it?
Tactile signage is subject to wear and tear, particularly in high-traffic areas. Over time, braille dots and raised characters can degrade, reducing readability and accessibility. Including a clear requirement for ongoing maintenance ensures that signage continues to meet accessibility needs throughout its lifecycle, rather than only at the point of installation.
Heading text
12.7 Tactile signs
Heading number portion
12.7
Item id
1774546503141_57
Heading id
s12.10.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Audible signs shall: a) be loud enough to be easily heard, the volume may need to be increased depending upon the ambient noise level complying with Clause 12.10.3; and b) be functional during a power outage.
What should we change it to?
Revise the clause to clarify that audible signage must provide information that is equivalent in content and timeliness to visual and tactile signage, ensuring equal access to all users. Revise subsection (a) to include that audible signage must also use an appropriate speech rate and clarity to ensure information is understandable.
Why should we change it?
Audible signage should not provide limited or supplementary information compared to visual signage. Ensuring equivalency in content and timing supports equitable access and prevents situations where individuals who rely on audio receive incomplete or delayed information. This aligns with accessibility principles that prioritize equal access rather than alternative or secondary access. In addition to volume, the speed and clarity of speech are critical for comprehension. If speech is too fast or unclear, information may not be usable, particularly in noisy environments. Including this requirement improves accessibility and usability
Heading text
12.10.1 General
Heading number portion
12.10.1
Item id
1774546550301_804
Heading id
s12.11.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Digital signs shall: a) present information in a format that is accessible; b) not rely solely on colour to convey information; and c) not include flashing content.
What should we change it to?
Revise subsection 12.11.1.a to specify that digital signage must conform to recognized accessibility standards (e.g., WCAG Level AA or higher) and be compatible with assistive technologies.
Why should we change it?
The phrase “accessible format” is broad and open to interpretation. Aligning digital signage with established accessibility standards such as WCAG ensures consistency, accountability, and measurable compliance, while supporting compatibility with screen readers and other assistive technologies.
Heading text
12.11.1 General
Heading number portion
12.11.1
Item id
1774546596657_496
Heading id
s12.11.2
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Digital signs shall: a) not scroll information; b) not require the user to track moving text; and c) present information in a manner that allows it to be read and understood.
What should we change it to?
Include an additional subsection (i.e., subsection 12.11.2.d) specifying that digital signage must provide auditory output or compatibility with assistive technologies to ensure access for individuals who cannot perceive visual information.
Why should we change it?
Even when visual content is presented clearly, it may still be inaccessible to individuals who are blind or partially sighted. Providing auditory alternatives or ensuring compatibility with assistive technologies supports equitable access and aligns with multi-sensory design principles.
Heading text
12.11.2 Usage
Heading number portion
12.11.2
Item id
1774546641473_834
Heading id
s13.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Maintenance of wayfinding systems shall ensure that all components remain functional, visible, and accessible.
What should we change it to?
Include an additional requirement specifying that maintenance must prioritize critical accessibility elements such as tactile signage, braille, audible systems, lighting, and digital accessibility features.
Why should we change it?
Not all elements of wayfinding systems have the same impact on accessibility. Prioritizing key accessibility features ensures that the most critical components for independent navigation are maintained consistently, reducing the risk of barriers for individuals with disabilities.
Heading text
13.1 General
Heading number portion
13.1
Item id
1774546688537_757
Heading id
s13.3
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Wayfinding systems shall be reviewed periodically to ensure continued effectiveness.
What should we change it to?
Revise the clause to specify that periodic reviews must include consultation with persons with disabilities, including individuals who are blind, partially sighted, and Deafblind, to assess real-world usability and effectiveness.
Why should we change it?
Periodic review is essential, but without input from individuals with lived experience, systems may continue to meet technical requirements while failing in practice. Including consultation ensures that wayfinding systems remain effective, relevant, and responsive to user needs over time.
Heading text
13.3 Design
Heading number portion
13.3
Submission ID
65010
Submitted by
rosalyn.commisso@cnib.ca
Submitted on
Thu, 03/26/2026 - 13:36
Consent to contact
Yes

Individual 65021's submission

CAN-ASC-2.4 – Wayfinding and Signage
Feedback items
Item id
1774647002025_746
Heading id
s7.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
recognizes the equity rights of persons with disabilities as Canadian citizens
What should we change it to?
recognizes the equity rights of all persons with disabilities in Canada
Why should we change it?
Equity and accessibility rights in Canada apply to all individuals, not just citizens, so the current wording is unnecessarily exclusionary.
Heading text
7.1 General
Heading number portion
7.1
Submission ID
65021
Submitted by
cliff_feng@hotmail.com
Submitted on
Fri, 03/27/2026 - 17:31
Consent to contact
Yes

Individual 65025's submission

CAN-ASC-2.4 – Wayfinding and Signage
Feedback items
Item id
1774797554502_704
Heading id
s6.2
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Editorial such as spelling, grammar, formatting and accessibility
What should we change?
No alt-text was included for images present in the draft document.
What should we change it to?
Any images reproduced in the final published document will have alt-text describing those images.
Why should we change it?
All documents should themselves be accessible and all images should be described so that everyone receives the same information.
Heading text
6.2 Guiding principles
Heading number portion
6.2
Item id
1774797733120_785
Heading id
s9.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Alternate format — Information presented in braille, in large print, electronically (e.g., on removable or portable media), or in an accessible format.
What should we change it to?
Remove this definition and replace all instances in the standard with “Accessible Format”.
Why should we change it?
The definition is almost the same as that for “Accessible Format”, and the word “accessible” is much clearer than the word “alternate”.
Heading text
9.1 Definitions
Heading number portion
9.1
Item id
1774797848933_887
Heading id
s9.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Note: Large print is considered to be 14 point or larger sans serif font.
What should we change it to?
Remove above text.
Why should we change it?
Wiser to add a separate definition of “large print”.
Heading text
9.1 Definitions
Heading number portion
9.1
Item id
1774797986474_445
Heading id
s9.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Cane-detectable — An object or surface texture modification that can be identified within the reach of a long white cane.
What should we change it to?
Cane-detectable — An object or surface texture modification that is within the reach of a long white cane tip, at or near ground level, that can be reliably identified.
Why should we change it?
Score lines etched into the pavement have been used as a warning at curbs but they are not reliably detectable. They would still be acceptable with the original definition. Also over head signs can be identified by a long white cane if you reach the cane up, so near or ground level is important.
Heading text
9.1 Definitions
Heading number portion
9.1
Item id
1774798265924_100
Heading id
s9.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Add definition.
What should we change it to?
Large print — text that is 16 to 18 point or larger.
Why should we change it?
Defining this parameter is preferable to defining it several times inconsistently throughout the standard, as is now the case. This comes from the Canadian National Institute for the Blind (CNIB) Clear Print guidelines. They don’t treat it as a single fixed size for every situation. Instead, they frame it as a range that improves readability for people with low vision, with flexibility depending on the audience. In practice: 16–18 pt standard “large print” for most documents 18+ pt often used when the audience has more significant vision loss. Headings may go even larger to support navigation.
Heading text
9.1 Definitions
Heading number portion
9.1
Item id
1774798560229_523
Heading id
s10.1.2
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
a) incorporate the following: i) colour rendering (minimum Ra > 80); ii) colour temperature around 3000 K; and iii) colour rendering index between 60 CRI and 70 CRI; and
What should we change it to?
a) incorporate the following: I) colour rendering (minimum Ra > 90); ii) colour temperature around 3000 K; and iii) colour rendering index between 90 CRI and 100 CRI; and
Why should we change it?
Best for those with low vision by enhancing contrast, distinguishing between similar colours, and maximizing visual acuity. For low vision, a high Color Rendering Index (CRI) of 90 or higher is strongly recommended to enhance contrast, make colours appear vivid, and improve visual accuracy.
Heading text
10.1.2 General lighting design
Heading number portion
10.1.2
Item id
1774798693526_711
Heading id
s10.1.2
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Add another point to clause b).
What should we change it to?
v) lighting should be down-cast and not directed horizontally into lines of sight.
Why should we change it?
For low vision, directing light into lines of sight can be disorienting.
Heading text
10.1.2 General lighting design
Heading number portion
10.1.2
Item id
1774798953566_178
Heading id
heading-29
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Add another clause.
What should we change it to?
e) ensure indoor spaces are lit to a minimum of 200 lx for interior paths of travel, stairs, ramps and escalators.
Why should we change it?
100 lx is fine for general rooms. 200 lx provides better visibility for paths of travel for those with low vision, to prevent potential trip or fall hazards.
Heading text
10.1.2.1 Basic lighting considerations
Heading number portion
10.1.2.1
Item id
1774799146284_251
Heading id
s10.1.3
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
b) ensure that the UGR value does not exceed 22 in circulation areas and does not exceed 19 in habitable rooms
What should we change it to?
b) ensure that the UGR value does not exceed 16 in circulation areas and does not exceed 13 in habitable rooms
Why should we change it?
Low vision often increases sensitivity to contrast and glare, making even “acceptable” levels (UGR-19) uncomfortable.
Heading text
10.1.3 Glare and shadow
Heading number portion
10.1.3
Item id
1774799323514_664
Heading id
heading-33
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
b) integrate artificial and natural lighting to provide comfortable, evenly distributed light at working surfaces and throughout circulation routes, at all times;
What should we change it to?
b) integrate artificial and natural lighting to provide comfortable, evenly distributed light at floor level and circulation routes, to minimize pools of light or shadows;
Why should we change it?
Working surfaces should have separate task lighting and floor level lighting consistency is key, as those with low vision focus their attention to this area as they move around.
Heading text
10.1.4.1 Natural and artificial lighting
Heading number portion
10.1.4.1
Item id
1774799490616_700
Heading id
heading-33
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
f) support visual tasks, such as identifying hazards, reading signs, navigating spaces and interpreting sign language; and
What should we change it to?
f) rooms and spaces should have multi-zoned lighting fixtures and options for spot lighting to support tasks for work surfaces, identifying hazards, reading signs, navigating spaces, increase visibility to speakers and interpreting sign language; and
Why should we change it?
Work surfaces were covered under evenly distributed lighting and should have separate task lighting. Visibility to speakers should be added.
Heading text
10.1.4.1 Natural and artificial lighting
Heading number portion
10.1.4.1
Item id
1774799621701_974
Heading id
heading-34
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
b) for surface-mounted fluorescent ceiling fixtures installed below 2440 mm: i) use darkened sides (i.e. not wrap-around lenses); and ii) position them perpendicular to the dominant direction of travel, or as valance-type lighting along the perimeter of a space to create indirect lighting; and
What should we change it to?
Remove above clause
Why should we change it?
Fluorescent lighting is not recommended for people with low vision due to high glare, flickering, and harsh blue light, which can cause headaches, eye strain, and reduced contrast sensitivity. It often causes excessive discomfort, especially for those with macular degeneration or cataracts.
Heading text
10.1.4.2 Indoor light fixtures
Heading number portion
10.1.4.2
Item id
1774799736079_395
Heading id
s10.3
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Add another note.
What should we change it to?
Note: Prioritize matte finishes. Use non-glossy or matte paint to minimize glare and reflections.
Why should we change it?
Glare and reflections can obscure signage and create tripping hazards for those with low vision.
Heading text
10.3 Colour choice
Heading number portion
10.3
Item id
1774799833492_637
Heading id
s10.3
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Add another note.
What should we change it to?
Note: Use bold contrasting colours like safety yellow for stair edges, handrails, door frames, and tactile warning tiles.
Why should we change it?
Bold contrasting colours like yellow are highly visible and commonly used.
Heading text
10.3 Colour choice
Heading number portion
10.3
Item id
1774800056844_383
Heading id
s10.3
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Add another note.
What should we change it to?
Note: Keep sign colours and layouts consistent throughout the environment.
Why should we change it?
Consistency avoids confusion.
Heading text
10.3 Colour choice
Heading number portion
10.3
Item id
1774800195810_788
Heading id
s11.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Wayfinding is facilitated by well-designed indoor and outdoor environments that incorporate clear paths of travel, along with constructed and natural navigation cues such as edges, landmarks, signage, surface textures, lighting, and acoustics that can be detected through visual, tactile, and auditory means.
What should we change it to?
Wayfinding is facilitated by well-designed indoor and outdoor environments that incorporate clear paths of travel, along with constructed and natural navigation cues such as edges, landmarks, signage, surface textures, lighting, and acoustics that can be detected through visual, tactile, and auditory means, as well as through the use of digital, smart technology.
Why should we change it?
As digital and smart technologies become part of everyday wayfinding, they are being used more and more to help people plan safe and efficient routes. Many people with disabilities already rely on these tools to guide their travel. At the same time, these technologies are widely used by others as well—seniors, people who are neurodivergent, and anyone who wants clear directions and to get where they’re going without hassle. Because of this, the standard needs to reference their availability and relevance.
Heading text
11.1 General
Heading number portion
11.1
Item id
1774800441592_409
Heading id
s12.2
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
a) be in an accessible format for the types of signage identified in Clauses 12.2.1, 12.2.2, 12.2.3, 12.2.4, 12.2.5, 12.2.6, and 12.2.7.
What should we change it to?
a) be in an accessible format for the types of signage identified in Clauses 12.2.1, 12.2.2, 12.2.3, 12.2.4, 12.2.5, 12.2.6, and 12.2.7, with some exceptions.
Why should we change it?
There are exceptions listed in 12.2.6 note 2 and implied in 12.2.7 and, therefore, the exceptions must either be removed or acknowledged.
Heading text
12.2 Types of signage
Heading number portion
12.2
Item id
1774800583592_73
Heading id
s12.2.9
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Trailhead signs in outdoor spaces shall be provided at the start of trails and wherever trail conditions change significantly and include:
What should we change it to?
Signs in outdoor spaces shall be provided at the start of trails and wherever trail conditions change significantly and include:
Why should we change it?
Mor than one type of signs is discussed.
Heading text
12.2.9 Signs for outdoor spaces
Heading number portion
12.2.9
Item id
1774800727185_698
Heading id
s12.3
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
C. include alternative communication methods, i.e., an audible technology, braille booklet or similar alternate format where there is an established need.
What should we change it to?
C. include alternative communication methods, i.e., an audible technology, braille booklet or similar accessible format.
Why should we change it?
Per suggestion regarding removal of the definition of “alternate format”, changing the word to “accessible”. It is often not possible to know in advance whether accessible formats will be required, and accessibility should always be the goal, regardless of level of need.
Heading text
12.3 Quality of information
Heading number portion
12.3
Item id
1774801003875_329
Heading id
s12.6.3
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
Note 1: Information signs should be placed in stairwells to identify all entry and exit points. Note 2: Floor numbers should be displayed on each level at both the top and bottom of staircases, as well as on handrails.
What should we change it to?
A) Information signs should be placed in stairwells to identify all entry and exit points. B) Floor numbers should be displayed on each level at both the top and bottom of staircases.
Why should we change it?
These requirements should be part of the standard, not just separate notes. The reference to signs on handrails was removed as it is too problematic.
Heading text
12.6.3 Stairs
Heading number portion
12.6.3
Item id
1774801217673_517
Heading id
s12.7.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
Note 2: In some cases, signs that include variable messages may display tactile elements for the permanent portion of the sign message. Note 3: Variable information may be presented in an alternate accessible format where appropriate.
What should we change it to?
Note 2: In some cases, signs that include variable messages shall display tactile elements for the permanent portion of the sign message. Note 3: Variable information shall be presented in an accessible format.
Why should we change it?
According to the clause quoted below, this is required. “Tactile signs shall: c) include an alternative communication method, such as audible technology, braille or large print booklets, or other digital assistive technologies, when containing large amounts of information, particularly in high-traffic areas or when the sign’s location makes providing tactile elements impractical or unsafe;”
Heading text
12.7.1 Tactile sign design and build elements
Heading number portion
12.7.1
Item id
1774801384695_681
Heading id
s12.11.6
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Note: Large text is defined as having a point size of 18 points or 14 points bold and larger, while regular text is consistent with font sizes usually found in body text.
What should we change it to?
Remove note.
Why should we change it?
A definition of “large print” creates more consistency.
Heading text
12.11.6 Colour factors
Heading number portion
12.11.6
Submission ID
65025
Submitted by
president@blindcanadians.ca
Submitted on
Sun, 03/29/2026 - 12:34
Consent to contact
Yes

Individual 65026's submission

CAN-ASC-2.4 – Wayfinding and Signage
Feedback items
Item id
1774801897334_75
Heading id
s6
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
While specific, as a practitioner in the planning and design of the built environment, I will struggle to implement much of the this section in any consistent way There are several ‘general statements’ that, when applied, will actually conflict with one another, and a practitioner would be forced into picking ‘one over another’ without guidance, relying on personal preference, rather than a technical standard. As such, what we are already seeing across Canada, namely, different applications of the same item through interpretation, will continue to proliferate and will lead to differing practices and applications from place to place, negating any attempts by this publication to create a ‘consistent standard.’ I would very much appreciate the opportunity to speak to the technical committee in depth about these items, as they are too numerous to list along with all the potential pitfalls/variants they create. Contact info: Peter.truch@me.com, (778)215-3879.
What should we change it to?
I will cite just one example of conflict, and how it causes issues in a somewhat circular fashion. I don’t necessarily propose a specific solution here, as I believe it should come from a consensus basis from the committee. This situation is specifically referring to outside, on a street corridor at a intersection or road crossing. A truncated dome tactile pad at a ramp letdown in Canada currently has (covering most situations) three different colours in practice. Most certainly, there are more with ‘one-offs’ that people can point to elsewhere beyond these three. The three colours that are all, generally speaking, compliant with surface contrast are yellow, safety red, and a rust/dirt red. The current draft standards do not specify a specific colour, only the contrast. However, there is a clause that suggest the colour should also correspond to the societal implications of meaning. So, is the intent of a truncated dome tactile pad a warning, or to stop before proceeding? This clause is important, as there are technical standards in Canada, in the form of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices in Canada (MUTCDC) produced by others that specify colours for those purposes. (Red means stop, yellow means warning). Hence, this document should specify what the intent is of the purpose of this device, then choose a corresponding colour. The confusion is furthered when within this standard, it is assumed that a directional wayfinding tactile pad CANNOT be yellow, to avoid confusion with a truncated dome warning tactile pad. This then applies that a truncated dome pad should be yellow, yet, much of central and eastern Canada regions use red or rust as the colour for the tactile. However, referring back to the MUTCDC, is a directional tactile indicator then not a warning? Or is it something else? Would yellow not be an appropriate colour for such a device? Irrespective, the MUTCDC specifies specific colours for our transportation system (which includes sidewalks and pathways) and should be a considered parallel standard that needs to be followed. Either way, said devices must provide specific contrast on different surface types and colours, specifically concrete (sidewalks) and asphalt (sometimes sidewalks, walking, paths, and multi-use paths). Finally, one must also consider the practical implications of what is currently being manufactured versus what could be in the future. Most manufacturers in Canada do not produce a significant variety of colours in each of the truncated dome and directional indicators that offer both the contrast and the durability for our climates. There are many many more examples like this, regarding positioning, placement, etc. that I have identified within this draft guide that will cause real problems for implementation, and the standard does not provide specificity to one to apply the standard effectively and consistently.
Why should we change it?
As outlined above with one example (I have identified many more), many technical components as outlined within this standard are not specific enough to be applied in a consistent, harmonized way across Canada, and will lead to further divergence in practice across the country. There will not be consistency from region to region, province to province, city to city, even from corner to corner in the same location. This is quite the opposite of this standard to harmonize and meet the needs of all persons. Again, I would like to speak in more detail with ASC to all of the items I have identified in my review of this draft standard. I believe with some focused discussion and thought, along with conscious decision making, we can dramatically improve this standard to allow for a harmonized approach across Canada.
Heading text
7. Scope
Heading number portion
7.
Item id
1774802066774_740
Heading id
s10.1.5
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
More specificity regarding 50 lx is required.
What should we change it to?
Statements about exactly how to measure this, the uniformity ratio, the surface area to measure, and more.
Why should we change it?
To ensure that lighting practitioners have proper guidance, and that other practitioners (e.g. municipal staff) have a specific guide that they can point to and ensure that the intent and practicality of the intent of lighting is met.
Heading text
10.1.5 Exterior lighting
Heading number portion
10.1.5
Item id
1774802168430_165
Heading id
s11.3.1
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
Some of these items are in conflict with guidelines and current practices with respect to road safety and transportation engineering.
What should we change it to?
Needs to be determined; some of the items are in contrast with one another.
Why should we change it?
To ensure consistency.
Heading text
11.3.1 Additional specifications for exterior paths of travel
Heading number portion
11.3.1
Item id
1774802277368_968
Heading id
s11.4
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
As per my comment on Section 10/11 in general, there are many conflicts within this section that need to be addressed.
What should we change it to?
Please contact me at peter.truch@me.com or (778) 215-3879 to discuss all of them, and to being to identify appropriate solutions.
Why should we change it?
Consistency.
Heading text
11.4 Tactile Walking Surface Indicator (TWSI)
Heading number portion
11.4
Item id
1774802352635_365
Heading id
s11
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Also as above, there are numerous conflicts when it comes to these standards and other standards that apply.
What should we change it to?
Please email peter.truch@me.com or call (778) 215-3879 to discuss.
Why should we change it?
Ensure consistent practices across Canada.
Heading text
12. Signage
Heading number portion
12.
Item id
1774802444148_711
Heading id
s12.10.2
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Temporary Construction Zones are entirely missed within this section.
What should we change it to?
These should be included.
Why should we change it?
Any temporary detour, sidewalk closure, etc. is next to impossible to navigate for a person with sight loss without providing additional guidance.
Heading text
12.10.2 Usage of audible signs
Heading number portion
12.10.2
Item id
1774802589461_919
Heading id
s12
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
Several instances where maps should be required to be tactile maps as well.
What should we change it to?
This ensures that more members of the population have universal access to the map.
Why should we change it?
Non-tactile maps exclude some people from use.
Heading text
13. Maps (non-tactile)
Heading number portion
13.
Submission ID
65026
Submitted by
peter.truch@me.com
Submitted on
Sun, 03/29/2026 - 12:51
Consent to contact
Yes

Individual 65033's submission

CAN-ASC-2.4 – Wayfinding and Signage
Feedback items
Item id
1774879420074_193
Heading id
s10.1.2
What kind of suggestion are you making?
Technical such as dimensions or application of the standard
What should we change?
10.1.2 a. ii. colour temperature around 3000K also ADD 10.1.3 c. avoid the following: i. overly lighting a space (or using too much light - not sure the best wording)
What should we change it to?
10.1.2 a.ii. colour temperature at or less than 2700K using full spectrum lamps
Why should we change it?
10.1.2 b. ii. 1. 3000K is too cold a colour based on personal experience and anecdotal comments in groups for highly sensitive and autistic individuals. It triggers discomfort, headache, and migraine. 2. colour temperature does not adequately reflect the quality of light in terms of wavelengths emitted. 10.1.2 c i. Inexpensive LED lighting, an increasing concern for managing liability and security has led to the overuse of bright, cold fixtures. This is not yet addressed in building code or lighting standards and needs to be addressed to keep spaces accessible. I have outlined the arguments for the avoidance of short wavelength LED light in this post on Substack, including research studies to back up each recommendation. https://substack.com/@clarekumar/note/p-188275797?utm_source=notes-share-action&r=1oe30i I've copied the post into a Word file as well. Apologies, I will be adding alt text to each of the images later this week.
Heading text
10.1.2 General lighting design
Heading number portion
10.1.2
Item id
1774879852397_397
Heading id
heading-29
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
10.1.2.1 Lighting design shall: a. ensure indoor spaces are lit to a minimum of 100 lx; b. ensure outdoor spaces are lit in compliance with Clause 10.1.5;
What should we change it to?
Add a. ensure indoor spaces are lit to a minimum of 100 lx, and not more than X b. ensure outdoor spaces are lit in compliance with Clause 10.1.5, and not more than X
Why should we change it?
We need protection from too much light. Before LED lighting, over-lighting a space was naturally prohibited by cost. Those controls are no longer there.
Heading text
10.1.2.1 Basic lighting considerations
Heading number portion
10.1.2.1
Item id
1774881201357_671
Heading id
s10.1.5
What kind of suggestion are you making?
General comments on the overall standard or a section such as things that are missing
What should we change?
10.1.5.a maintain lighting levels of 50 lx over frequently used paths of travel, including walkways, paths of travel, stairs, and ramps, measured at the ground;
What should we change it to?
10.1.5.a maintain lighting levels of 50 lx and not more than X over frequently used paths of travel, including walkways, paths of travel, stairs, and ramps, measured at the ground;
Why should we change it?
people are being designed out of using spaces - roads, streets, restaurants, everywhere because of too much light. Colour temperature and intensity both matter.
Heading text
10.1.5 Exterior lighting
Heading number portion
10.1.5
Submission ID
65033
Submitted by
clare@clarekumar.com
Submitted on
Mon, 03/30/2026 - 10:36
Consent to contact
Yes

Pagination

  • First page first
  • Previous page Prev
  • Page 56
  • Page 57
  • Current page 58
  • Page 59
  • Page 60
  • Next page Next
  • Last page last
Report a problem on this page
Please select all that apply (required)

Share widget

Date modified:
2026-04-04

Follow Us

  • Facebook
  • X
  • LinkedIn

Accessibility Standards Canada

  • Login
  • Create an account

About government

Government of Canada

  • All contacts
  • Departments and agencies
  • About government

Themes and topics

  • Jobs
  • Immigration and citizenship
  • Travel and tourism
  • Business
  • Benefits
  • Health
  • Taxes
  • Environment and natural resources
  • National security and defence
  • Culture, history and sport
  • Policing, justice and emergencies
  • Transport and infrastructure
  • Canada and the world
  • Money and finances
  • Science and innovation
  • Indigenous Peoples
  • Veterans and military
  • Youth
  • Manage life events

Brand

  • Social Media
  • Mobile Applications
  • About Canada.ca
  • Terms and conditions
  • Privacy
  • Accessibility Statement
  • Site map
Top of Page
Symbol of the Government of Canada