Edit comment LC-617 for Accessibility Guidelines Working Group

Quick access to

Previous: LC-1069 Next: LC-1070

Comment LC-617: Comment Shortname:; Commenter: Lisa Seeman 4 <lisa@ubaccess.com> on behalf of Invited expert at W3C, UB access; Message-id:; Section of the document concerned:

or; Refinement of the section concerned:; Status:
assigned to; Type:; Resolution status:
Response drafted Resolution implemented Reply sent to commenter; Response status:
No response from Commenter yet Commenter approved disposition Commenter objected to disposition
Commenter's response (URI):; Comment:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-comments-wcag20/2006May/0137.html
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-comments-wcag20/2006May/att-0137/wcagform4ch.html

Comment (including rationale for any proposed change):

from the appendix...
"If style sheets are in your baseline, WCAG 1.0 checkpoint 6.1 (that the word order of text needs to make sense without css) is not required;"

I do not understand this example, In fact it seems to highlight the problem of baseline - that an accessibility problem will persist even if a technology is supported by Assistive technology. For example An Assistive technology may be able to work with Aural CSS (if it was not depreciated) display visible, phuedo class etc, and still not be able to work out what the reading order is just based of pixel positioning of test in columns (without more information).

surely text out of order will not be understandable by assistive technologies even when CSS is supported?

7, Overall people are struggling understanding the baseline concept. One person, hugely talented and experienced in accessibility thought that if all pages used CSS then 6.1 does not matter any more

Proposed Change:

How can we define baseline so that 6.1 is supported in this baseline?; Related issues: (space separated ids); WG Notes: [TEAMA] Even if style sheets are in the baseline, the content must satisfy SC 1.3.3. The Failure "Failure of SC 1.3.3 due to changing the meaning of content by positioning information with CSS." would explicitly prohibit this sort of use of CSS. -- Discussed on the 22 June 2006 teleconference resolution: accept as proposed with addition of action item cited by Christophe http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2006/06/22-wai-wcag-minutes.html {partial accept} DONE change the bullet in Appendix D from "if style sheets are in your baseline, WCAG 1.0 checkpoint 6.1 is not required;" to "if style sheets are in your baseline, WCAG 1.0 checkpoint 6.1 is not required, but the meaning of the content must not depend on CSS positioning (SC 1.3.3);" in order to avoid confusion in the future? XML Source updated 07 July 2006.; Resolution: The working group agrees that the problem you cite should not be allowed. However, that problem is already not allowed with the current guidelines. Even if style sheets are in the baseline, the content must satisfy SC 1.3.3. The Failure "Failure of SC 1.3.3 due to changing the meaning of content by positioning information with CSS." would explicitly prohibit this sort of use of CSS.; (Please make sure the resolution is adapted for public consumption)