The results of this questionnaire are available to anybody.
This questionnaire was open from 2012-07-25 to 2012-08-10.
5 answers have been received.
Jump to results for question:
3.2.2 Back Button: The user can reverse recognized hyperlink navigation actions (e.g. via a back button or equivalent). (Level AA) Note: This may include actions by the user (e.g. activating a link to a new page or a new anchor within the same page) as well as some content actions, such as auto-redirection.
|Agree with the proposal||3|
|Disagree with the proposal|
|Neutral, will accept consensus of the group||1|
|Suggest the following changes to the proposal||1|
|Responder||Proposed 3.2.2 Back Button||3.2.2|
|Jan Richards||Agree with the proposal|
|Jim Allan||Suggest the following changes to the proposal||need something about "except where prevented by the author/application for financial or other types of transactions"|
|Greg Lowney||Neutral, will accept consensus of the group||I could live with it, but I'd prefer if it covered navigation by entering a URI (e.g. typing into the address bar) and choosing from the navigation history (which might or might not be considered a hyperlink).|
We could keep the proposed wording, or use something like one of these:
3.2.2 Back Button: The user can reverse recognized navigation actions caused by hyperlinks or address entry (e.g. via a back button or equivalent). (Level AA)
3.2.2 Back Button: The user can reverse recognized navigation between web addresses [or "URIs", or "web resources"?] (e.g. standard "back button" functionality). (Level AA).
The Intent should recommend multi-level undo for navigation, rather than just single-level. Also, does the current wording imply strongly enough that state should be restored to the amount feasible for the page?
|Kimberly Patch||Agree with the proposal|
|Kelly Ford||Agree with the proposal|
Everybody has responded to this questionnaire.