The current document talks a lot about "people with disabilities" but doesn't mention at what times those people are disabled. This feels like an awkward adherence to the medical model of disability, where someone's condition makes them disabled. For WCAG 3.0 it would be better to include something about the aim of the document being that applications and websites are built so as not to disable people.

Some examples:

1. a user with sensory disorders is disabled using a website when the site uses automatically playing audio and video; they may not be disabled when the site doesn't do that
2. an autistic user is disabled when the site uses jargon and idiom that the user isn't used to. If the site uses plain language, the user isn't disabled
3. a user with limited dexterity is disabled when a site or application requires a greater amount of dexterity

In these instances, the user is disabled by the website or application, not their condition.

When talking to businesses about disabilities and web accessibility, the greatest success I've had is when I talk to them about changing their mindset from "disabled people" to "people we disable". They're more likely to accept that their actions are what disables people and take action to prevent that, rather than trying to build something "to help disabled people." Not disabling people seems an easier concept to grasp.

A small acknowledgement in the introduction that the aim is to prevent people being disabled by apps and websites would go a long way towards shifting the conversation, making it easier for people who design and build websites to understand the impact their actions take (it's their actions that disable people).