W3C

List of comments on “Techniques for WCAG 2.0” (dated 11 September 2014)

Quick access to

There are 6 comments (sorted by their types, and the section they are about).

substantive comments

Comment LC-2992: Merging Techniques c12,c13 and 14
Commenter: Antonio Giovanni Schiavone <schiavone@isti.cnr.it> (archived message)
Context: in (c12,c13 and 14)
I always wondered why in Techniques for WCAG 2.0 there are three different techniques (c12, c13 and c14) for the same problem, ie how to specify text font size.

My proposal is to merge them together in a single technique

Proposed Change:
A new technique that will merge c12,c13 and c14.
Its procedure will be:

1) Check that the value of the CSS property that defines the font size is a percentage.
2) Check that the value of the CSS property that defines the font size is one of xx-small, xx-small, x-small, small, medium, large, x-large, xx-large, xsmaller, or larger.
3) Check that the value of the CSS property that defines the font size is expressed in em units.


Expected Results

Check #1 or Check #2 or Check #3 is true
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

Comment LC-2966: Proposal to review guidelines for language markup appropriateness
Commenter: Jens O. Meiert <jens@meiert.com> (archived message)
Context: in
assigned to Andrew Kirkpatrick
Resolution status:

Following “HTML and Specifying Language” [1] and “Usefulness of
language annotations” [2] I propose to review guidelines that mandate
marking up changes in language for appropriateness (like H58 [3]).

The primary arguments for this proposal are that 1) determining
language is per definitionem not an accessibility problem, and that 2)
requiring authors to mark up all changes in language is a costly and
unrealistic requirement, and one that may be better and more
efficiently done by software at that.

My interest in pursuing a WCAG conversation has been killed; although
a bit scattered you find materials clarifying and elaborating the
proposal in [1] (also review the comments) and [2].


[1] http://meiert.com/en/blog/20140825/html-and-language/
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2014JulSep/thread.html#msg136
[3] http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/H58.html
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

Comment LC-2997: UA support/h69
Commenter: Mark Rogers <mark.rogers@powermapper.com > (archived message)
Context: in (h69)
I was doing some research on this technique and the UA notes:
http://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/Techniques/ua-notes/html#H69

Opera hasn't supported keyboard heading navigation since switching from Presto to Blink in July 2013
http://forums.opera.com/discussion/1834402/navigation-over-links/p1

The Vimium extension they mention as a replacement doesn't appear to
support heading navigation either

The currently documented Opera keyboard shortcuts now look identical to other browsers:
http://help.opera.com/opera/Windows/1387/en/fasterBrowsing.html#keyboard

The Firefox landmark extension from TPG has been mentioned as an alternative, but this doesn't support heading navigation either. I've checked both the source code and and installed on a clean VM
https://github.com/matatk/landmarks

The other alternatives mentioned in the H69 UA notes either no longer work on current browsers or don't have working download links.

Conclusion: there's no longer UA support for this technique

Best Regards
Mark



Proposed Change:
Given there appears to be no current UA support for this technique for keyboard users, should it be retired?

If someone does find UA support for it, then the UA notes should be updated accordingly.
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

Comment LC-2985: Non-unique ID on its own not a failure of 1.3.1
Commenter: Jason Kiss <jason@accesscult.org> on behalf of New Zealand Government (archived message)
Context: in
assigned to Andrew Kirkpatrick
Resolution status:

While it is true that non-unique ID value is a failure of SC 4.1.1, and may very well introduce a failure of SC 1.3.1 where that ID value is referenced by another element in order to establish a relationship, it's not clear why two elements that have identical ID values but that otherwise aren't referenced by additional elements or in any one-to-one relationship.

Proposed Change:
Under Failure Example 1, change "An id attribute value that is not unique" to something like "An id attribute value that is not unique and that is referenced by another element to establish a relationship."

Under Procedure, change "1. Check for id and accesskey values which are not unique within the document." into two steps: "1. Check for id attribue values that are not unique within the document and that are referenced by other elements. 2. Check for accesskey values that are not unique within the document."
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

editorial comments

Comment LC-2986: Test H95 is missing step 2
Commenter: Wilco Fiers <wilco@accessibility.nl> (archived message)
Context: in
assigned to Andrew Kirkpatrick
Resolution status:

Step 2 of the test procedure in H95 only has the text "step_two." as it's value. That doesn't seem right. Also, this feedback form doesn't have H95 listed under the techniques.
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

Comment LC-2994: Meaning of "Alternate version" is not clear
Commenter: Liam Morland <lkmorlan@uwaterloo.ca> on behalf of University of Waterloo (archived message)
Context: in (G136)
Not assigned
Resolution status:

The example suggests that the link text to the conforming alternate version be "Alternate version". This does not clearly identify that the link goes to an accessible version of the same content.

Proposed Change:
Replace: "Alternate version"
With: "WCAG-conforming alternate version"
Or: "WCAG-conforming alternate version of this page"
(space separated ids)
(Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)

Add a comment.


Developed and maintained by Dominique Hazaël-Massieux (dom@w3.org).
$Id: index.html,v 1.1 2017/08/11 06:40:09 dom Exp $
Please send bug reports and request for enhancements to w3t-sys.org