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-2872 LC-2873 LC-2874 LC-2875 LC-2877 LC-2878 LC-2879 LC-2880 LC-2881 LC-2882 LC-2883 LC-2884 LC-2885 LC-2886 LC-2887 LC-2888 LC-2889 LC-2890 LC-2891 LC-2892 LC-2894 LC-2896 LC-2897 LC-2898 LC-2899 LC-2901 LC-2902 LC-2903 LC-2904 LC-2906 LC-2907
Previous: LC-2894 Next: LC-2881
G101 is not a solution to SC 3.1.3 on it’s own. The how to meet document contains a structure based on multiple possible combinations of techniques, including G101 to create a few distinct possible solutions to SC 3.1.3. This is fairly confusing and almost impossible to test. This is the only criterium in How to meet that works by pairing multiple techniques in different ways to gain a single result. Reading one of the techniques thus doesn’t really tell you how to solve for SC 3.1.3. I expect this was done to avoid duplication of content, but I think this little bit of duplication can avoid a lot of confusion. And it’s not like there is no duplication in other techniques either. So instead of building a logical structure in How to meet, move this logic into one or multiple techniques. This comment is part of the project for the Accessibility Support Database Proposed Change: I think the best solution would be to flatten the How to meet into simply having the following 5 techniques, each of which can be used to meet the criteria without strange combinations with other techniques. - H40: Using definition lists - H60: Using the link element to link to a glossary - H54: Using the dfn element to identify the defining instance of a word - G62: Providing a glossary - G70: Providing a function to search an online dictionary All the things the other criteria require is moved into these techniques, such as that with a definition list you should also link the definition to the definition list, and that if the same phrase is used differently on the same page it is insufficient to only link the first occurrence. This could perhaps also be a failure.