w3c/wbs-design or
by mail to sysreq.
W3C
Site Navigation
Nearby
Results of Questionnaire UAWG Survey for 12 July 2012
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:
1. Proposed 3.2.2 Back Button
Proposed 3.2.2
from email
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.
Summary
| Choice | All responders |
|---|---|
| Results | |
| 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 |
Details
| 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 |
More details on responses
- Jan Richards: last responded on 26, July 2012 at 15:29 (UTC)
- Jim Allan: last responded on 26, July 2012 at 16:45 (UTC)
- Greg Lowney: last responded on 26, July 2012 at 17:00 (UTC)
- Kimberly Patch: last responded on 26, July 2012 at 17:03 (UTC)
- Kelly Ford: last responded on 26, July 2012 at 17:44 (UTC)
Everybody has responded to this questionnaire.
Compact view of the results / list of email addresses of the responders
WBS home / Questionnaires / WG questionnaires / Answer this questionnaire
Report issues
on GitHub project