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-2464 LC-2476 LC-2490 LC-2571 LC-2572 LC-2587 LC-2588 LC-2599 LC-2600 LC-2645 LC-2685 LC-2716 LC-2720 LC-2725 LC-2727 LC-2743 LC-2758 LC-2759 LC-2760 LC-2762 LC-2763 LC-2766 LC-2767 LC-2768 LC-2769 LC-2778 LC-2779 LC-2780 LC-2876 LC-2922 LC-2941 LC-2942 LC-2964 LC-2972
Previous: LC-2942 Next: LC-2766
I need clarification on *2.3.1 Info & Relationships*. Can you tell me if my interpretation is correct: I think it is possible to pass WCAG 2.0 SC 1.3.1 without using ARIA landmarks. As much as I love ARIA landmarks...I do not think they are required in WCAG 2.0. I always recommend them, but I don't currently have my team call a WCAG 2.0 violation on SC 1.3.1 if ARIA landmarks are missing. Thanks in advance for your insight (as you might guess, the Deque Accessibility Experts are not in agreement in how to interpret this).