This document:Public document·View comments·Disposition of Comments·
Nearby:Accessibility Guidelines Working Group Other specs in this tool Accessibility Guidelines Working Group's Issue tracker
Quick access to LC-2585 LC-2586 LC-2597 LC-2603 LC-2604 LC-2607 LC-2608 LC-2614 LC-2615 LC-2616 LC-2617 LC-2618 LC-2621 LC-2624 LC-2629 LC-2630 LC-2633 LC-2634 LC-2717 LC-2722 LC-2733 LC-2744 LC-2747 LC-2748 LC-2749 LC-2774 LC-2781 LC-2782 LC-2783 LC-2828 LC-2829
Previous: LC-2607 Next: LC-2749
We are working hard at Deque to make sure that our tools (FireEyes and WorldSpace) accurately interpret the WCAG 2.0 standard. A current debate on our team is the requirement for the location of the "skip to main" link for meeting 2.4.1 ByPass Blocks. The normative part of WCAG 2.0 states: 2.4.1 Bypass Blocks: A mechanism<http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#mechanismdef> is available to bypass blocks of content that are repeated on multiple Web pages<http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#webpagedef>. (Level A) In the informative "Sufficient Techniques" listed for 2.4.1, there is a technique listed: G1: Adding a link at the top of each page that goes directly to the main content area<http://www.w3.org/TR/2012/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20120103/G1> In the procedure to test G1, the first step states: 1) Check that a link is the first focusable control on the Web page. At this point...we are a long, long way from the "normative" part of the WCAG 2.0. So, the clarification I seek is this? Should automated accessibility testing tools throw a WCAG 2.0 A violation on 2.4.1 if the "skip to main" link is anything other than the absolute first focusable item on the page? My humble (personal opinion) is...the normative portion of WCAG 2.0 does not indicate that it must be the first link. So, I've never demanded that the "skip to main" link be the absolute first item on the page. However, WorldSpace and FireEyes are currently throwing an WCAG 2.0 2.4.1 violation if the "skip to main" link is not the very first focusable item on a page. Can you tell me the proper interpretation so I can make sure our software is supporting the true intent of WCAG 2.0 2.4.1.