Edit comment LC-2463 for Accessibility Guidelines Working Group

Quick access to LC-2429 LC-2453 LC-2454 LC-2455 LC-2461 LC-2462 LC-2463 LC-2468 LC-2470 LC-2472 LC-2473 LC-2474 LC-2477 LC-2478 LC-2479 LC-2480 LC-2495 LC-2497 LC-2498 LC-2499 LC-2501

Comment LC-2463

Comment Shortname:

Commenter: Sailesh Panchang <spanchang02@yahoo.com>

Message-id:

Section of the document concerned:

[Free text description]Document as a wholeIntroduction to Understanding WCAG 2.0 Understanding the Four Principles of Accessibility Layers of Guidance The Guidelines Success Criteria Sufficient and Advisory Techniques Text Alternatives: Understanding Guideline 1.1 Intent of Guideline 1.1 Non-text Content: Understanding SC 1.1.1 Time-based Media: Understanding Guideline 1.2 Audio-only and Video-only (Prerecorded): Understanding SC 1.2.1 Captions (Prerecorded): Understanding SC 1.2.2 Audio Description or Media Alternative (Prerecorded): Understanding SC 1.2.3 Captions (Live): Understanding SC 1.2.4 Audio Description (Prerecorded): Understanding SC 1.2.5 Sign Language (Prerecorded): Understanding SC 1.2.6 Extended Audio Description (Prerecorded): Understanding SC 1.2.7 Media Alternative (Prerecorded): Understanding SC 1.2.8 Audio-only (Live): Understanding SC 1.2.9 Adaptable: Understanding Guideline 1.3 Info and Relationships: Understanding SC 1.3.1 Meaningful Sequence: Understanding SC 1.3.2 Sensory Characteristics: Understanding SC 1.3.3 Distinguishable: Understanding Guideline 1.4 Use of Color: Understanding SC 1.4.1 Audio Control: Understanding SC 1.4.2 Contrast (Minimum): Understanding SC 1.4.3 Resize text: Understanding SC 1.4.4 Images of Text: Understanding SC 1.4.5 Contrast (Enhanced): Understanding SC 1.4.6 Low or No Background Audio: Understanding SC 1.4.7 Visual Presentation: Understanding SC 1.4.8 Images of Text (No Exception): Understanding SC 1.4.9 Keyboard Accessible: Understanding Guideline 2.1 No Keyboard Trap: Understanding SC 2.1.2 Keyboard (No Exception): Understanding SC 2.1.3 Enough Time: Understanding Guideline 2.2 Timing Adjustable: Understanding SC 2.2.1 Pause, Stop, Hide: Understanding SC 2.2.2 No Timing: Understanding SC 2.2.3 Interruptions: Understanding SC 2.2.4 Re-authenticating: Understanding SC 2.2.5 Seizures: Understanding Guideline 2.3 Three Flashes or Below Threshold: Understanding SC 2.3.1 Three Flashes: Understanding SC 2.3.2 Navigable: Understanding Guideline 2.4 Bypass Blocks: Understanding SC 2.4.1 Page Titled: Understanding SC 2.4.2 Focus Order: Understanding SC 2.4.3 Link Purpose (In Context): Understanding SC 2.4.4 Multiple Ways: Understanding SC 2.4.5 Headings and Labels: Understanding SC 2.4.6 Focus Visible: Understanding SC 2.4.7 Location: Understanding SC 2.4.8 Link Purpose (Link Only): Understanding SC 2.4.9 Section Headings: Understanding SC 2.4.10 Readable: Understanding Guideline 3.1 Language of Page: Understanding SC 3.1.1 Language of Parts: Understanding SC 3.1.2 Unusual Words: Understanding SC 3.1.3 Abbreviations: Understanding SC 3.1.4 Reading Level: Understanding SC 3.1.5 Pronunciation: Understanding SC 3.1.6 Predictable: Understanding Guideline 3.2 On Focus: Understanding SC 3.2.1 On Input: Understanding SC 3.2.2 Consistent Navigation: Understanding SC 3.2.3 Consistent Identification: Understanding SC 3.2.4 Change on Request: Understanding SC 3.2.5 Input Assistance: Understanding Guideline 3.3 Error Identification: Understanding SC 3.3.1 Labels or Instructions: Understanding SC 3.3.2 Error Suggestion: Understanding SC 3.3.3 Error Prevention (Legal, Financial, Data): Understanding SC 3.3.4 Help: Understanding SC 3.3.5 Error Prevention (All): Understanding SC 3.3.6 Compatible: Understanding Guideline 4.1 Parsing: Understanding SC 4.1.1 Name, Role, Value: Understanding SC 4.1.2 Understanding Conformance Understanding Conformance Requirements Understanding Requirement 1 Understanding Requirement 2 Understanding Requirement 3 Understanding Requirement 4 Understanding Requirement 5 Understanding Conformance Claims Understanding Levels of Conformance Understanding Accessibility Support Understanding "Programmatically Determined" Understanding Conforming Alternate Versions Understanding "Web Page" Understanding "Text Alternatives" Appendix A How to refer to WCAG 2.0 from other documents Appendix B Documenting Accessibility Support for Uses of a Web Technology Appendix C Understanding Metadata Appendix D References
or

Refinement of the section concerned:

Status:

open proposal pending resolved_yes resolved_no resolved_partial other assigned to Nobody Abma, Jake Abou-Zahra, Shadi Allan, Jim Auclair, Christopher Avila, Jonathan Babinszki, Tom Bailey, Bruce Bernard, Renaldo Bernier, Alex Blake, Matthew Boudreau, Denis Brewer, Judy Butler, Shari Campbell, Alastair Carlson, Laura Chakravarthula, Srinivasu Cirrincione, Pietro Conway, Vivienne Cooper, Michael Crutchfield, Elizabeth Deltour, Romain Dick, Wayne Ding, Chaohai Dirks, Kim Dixit, Shwetank Draffan, E.A. Duggin, Alistair Eggert, Eric Elledge, Michael Faulkner, Steve Ferraz, Reinaldo Fiers, Wilco Fischer, Detlev Foliot, John Garrish, Matt Garrison, Alistair Gower, Michael Guarino Reid, Loretta Hakkinen, Markku Haritos-Shea, Katie Henry, Shawn Hoffmann, Thomas Horton, Sarah Isager, Kasper Jensen, Tobias Christian Johansson, Stefan Johlic, Marc Johnson, Rick Jones, Crystal Joys Andersen, Wilhelm Kapoor, Shilpi Keim, Oliver Kirkpatrick, Andrew Kirkwood, John Kiss, Jason Kraft, Maureen Ku, JaEun Kurapati, Sujasree Lauke, Patrick Lauriat, Shawn Lee, Steve Lemon, Gez Li, Alex Li, Kepeng Li, Liangcheng Loiselle, Chris Lowney, Greg Lui, Edwina Lund, Adam Ma, Jia MacDonald, David Mace, Amanda Manser, Erich Martin, Debra McCormack, Scott McMeeking, Chris McSorley, Jan Milliken, Neil Montgomery, Rachael Mueller, Mary Jo nicole, windmann Niemann, Gundula Nurthen, James O Connor, Joshue Oh, Jeong-Hun Panchang, Sailesh Pandhi, Charu Pasi, Aparna Patch, Kimberly Philipp, Melanie Pluke, Mike Pouncey, Ian Repsher, Stephen Rochford, John Runyan, Marla Savva, Andreas Sawczyn, Steve Schnabel, Stefan Seeman-Kestenbaum, Lisa Sims, Glenda Singh, Avneesh Skotkjerra, Stein Erik Sloan, David Smith, Alan Smith, Jim Solomon, Adam Spellman, Jeanne F Strobbe, Christophe Suprock, Greg Swallow, David Thompson, Kenneth Thyme, Anne Ueki, Makoto Vaishnav, Jatin Vanderheiden, Gregg Venkata, Manoj Wahlbin, Kathleen Wang, Can WANG, WEI White, Jason Zelmanowicz, Erica Zerner, Adam Zhang, Mengni

Type: substantive editorial typo question general comment undefined

Resolution status:

Response drafted Resolution implemented Reply sent to commenter

Response status:

No response from Commenter yet Commenter approved disposition Commenter objected to disposition
Commenter's response (URI):

Comment:

Further to my email on the same subject sent last week:
It appears from reading the 'understanding' material for SC 1.3.2 and 2.4.3, and associated techniques, that the expected reading order determined visually is key to identifying correct reading sequence from an accessibility standpoint.
G59(Placing the interactive elements in an order that follows sequences and relationships within the content) states:
"When the order of the HTML source matches the visual order of the Web page, tabbing through the content follows the visual layout of the content. When the source order does not match the visual order, the tab order through the content must reflect the logical relationships in the content that are displayed visually".
Then C27: suggests making the DOM order match the visual order.
“The objective of this technique is to ensure that the order of content in the source code is the same as the visual presentation of the content”.
Then it goes on to describes the problems if the DOM order does not match visual order. These are accurate and very valid. So if above stated objective is not attained, then does the content not fail the SC?
Comment:
For every page there is only one intended reading order and the author sets out the page in that manner. This will generally be the order one might reasonably expect based on a visual inspection of the page. The focus order of nav elements should follow that reading order.
It is the user’s prerogative to read / navigate it in a different order if he so chooses. And he may do so because the alternate order helps him to better understand the content or simply because only certain blocks of content are of immediate relevance / interest. Proper structural markup would support this.
If these techniques are to be applied to make content comply with SC 1.3.2 then can one conclude that if actual reading and focus order do not follow expected visual order, then there is a problem and content fails SC 1.3.2 / SC 2.4.3?

I agree that CSS can be used to change presentation. But it should not suggest a reading / focus order that is different from DOM / actual order that is programmatically determinable.

Related issues: (space separated ids)

WG Notes:

Resolution: You may be confusing techniques with success criteria. One technique may suggest one solution while another techniques suggests quite another - and the two may conflict. Techniques are just that. They are optional. You do not need to use them. You often have a choice between techniques. You also don't need to use any of the techniques listed here. You can make up your own if you know that it will meet the success criteria. The techniques were created for 3 reasons. 1) in order for us to be sure there were ways to meet each SC 2) to learn more about the SC and their implications by creating solutions for each 3) to provide easy ways for people to find solutions But techniques are not required and they are not rules. And there are sometime good reasons for things to differ from the DOM. Though they should be good reasons.

(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)