2.2.7 comments
SC Context
Success Criterion 2.2.4 Interruptions
(Level AAA) [Existing] Interruptions can be postponed or suppressed by the user, except interruptions involving an emergency.
Success Criterion 2.2.7 Interruptions (Minimum) [In Nov. working draft]
(Level AA)
A mechanism is easily available to postpone and suppress interruptions and changes in content, unless they are initiated by the user or involve an emergency.
Success Criterion 2.2.7 Interruptions (Minimum) [Proposals for Discussion]
Proposal 1
(Level AA)
A mechanism is available to postpone and suppress interruptions, unless they are initiated by the user or involve an emergency.
emergency [existing definition, add link] a sudden, unexpected situation or occurrence that requires immediate action to preserve health, safety, or property
Interruption An uninvited change of context
or
Interruption A break in the uniformity or continuity of the context or process. Note: Alert, warning, and notification messages and live updates when the purpose of the application is monitoring are not interruptions.
Proposal 2
(Level AA)
A mechanism is available to postpone and suppress unnecessary interruptions, unless they are initiated by the user or involve an emergency.
emergency [existing definition, add link] a sudden, unexpected situation or occurrence that requires immediate action to preserve health, safety, or property
Unnecessary interruptions: Secondary information, pop-ups, or actions that are not part of the workflow sequence or the key purpose of the application. Note: Error, success, and warning messages; timeout notifications, live updates when the purpose of the application is monitoring are not unnecessary interruptions.
Proposal 3
(Level AA)
Changes that move focus or interrupt the display of content are deliberately user initiated, or are necessitated by an emergency.
Comments
Proposed response for Issue 554 (from 8 November discussion)
Because content changes are already covered by 2.2.2, we have removed that from 2.2.7.
Proposed response for Issue 529 (from 8 November discussion)
We added a timeout warning into the exceptions for 2.2.7 (which keeps it consistent with 2.2.1 Extend exception "warned before time expires").
Easily Available #373, #375, #444
A mechanism is "easily available" #373
michael-n-cooper commented on Sep 7 Interruptions (Minimum) uses the term "easily available", with a definition, where we would normally use the phrase "A mechanism is available...". I am uncertain if we need a special definition for "easily available" to differentiate from "available". Perhaps we can remove the term, or just define the term as "available" rather than "easily available".
"easily available" not in definition format #375
michael-n-cooper commented on Sep 8 The definition for the term easily available does not fit into definition format we use from WCAG 2.0, where the first line of term should be a phrase that in principle could drop in place of the term within the SC text. The definition would come out as "one or more of the following are true:" viewed that way, which defers all substance to the subsequent list. I can't fix this one as an editorial change, so filing an issue.
IBM comment 2 on 2.2.7 Interruptions (Minimum) #444
mbgower commented on Oct 8 IBM requests removal of the subjective word "easily" from the term "easily available", and the removal of the new definition, which is overly prescriptive.
Proposed Solution
Remove "easily" and address mechanisms in understanding documents.
Define Interruptions #447, #474, #493
IBM comment 5 on 2.2.7 Interruptions (Minimum) #447
mbgower commented on Oct 8 Error messages are not included as an exception, which suggests that a user could not be made aware of input errors and other matters preventing successful completion of a task.
Comment on 2.2.7 Interruptions (Minimum) #474
AidanA11y commented 29 days ago To be testable the term interruptions needs more specifics.
Here are a few common scenarios that seem to fail but may be problematic:
validation error messages (these are system generated) a 'toast' message to confirm success of an action a contextual help overlay (e.g. "hold camera steady to capture image") an overlay that appears on top of the main content at page load. session timeout warning
Comment on 2.2.7 Interruptions (Minimum) #493
jnurthen commented 29 days ago Emergency is not linked to the definition. Is the definition the same?
There needs to be an exception for essential messages not just emergency messages. For example in a call center application if a user does not receive the message that there is an incoming call the application would not be functional. Also in pretty much any application if there is downtime about to start the user needs to know so they can complete their task to avoid losing data. These exceptions must be accounted for by the SC.
====Proposed Definitions====Unnecessary interruptions: Secondary information, pop-ups, or actions that are not part of the workflow sequence such as error and timeout messages or the key purpose of the application such as live updates.
Interruption an uninvited change of context.
Interruption An uninvited change of context
Changes in Content #446
IBM comment 4 on 2.2.7 Interruptions (Minimum) #446
Including "changes in content" in this SC about interruptions is unnecessarily expanding the concept of 'interruption' as it exists at level AAA. The referenced Distraction paper ties such content primarily to advertising and other content beyond control of the content author. IBM anticipates unlooked for complications from the inclusion of "changes in content" and requests its removal. One example, all time-based media would seem to violate it. As well, the verbosity of notices for screen updates would normally be the jurisdiction of ATs or potentially user agents, based on user preferences.
=Proposed resolution
This is the same as 554: Because content changes are already covered by 2.2.2, we have removed that from 2.2.7.
Level Concern #206, #443
TPG comment on 2.2.4 Interruptions #206
Until browsers or the OS provide a mechanism for suppressing interruptions, this SC effectively mandates provision of a web-based personalisation widget. We don't think that is appropriate for a Level AA SC, but rather than push it to Level AAA, we suggest simplifying and strengthening the SC to remove that requirement.
Here is our suggested SC:
"Changes that move focus or interrupt the display of content are deliberately user initiated, or are necessitated by an emergency. (Level AA)"
There would need to be a definition of "interrupt" and/or some examples. There would also need to be a definition of "deliberately user-initiated", which might be something like:
"Deliberately user initiated: An intentional discrete action such as clicking, pressing a key or speaking a voice command."
[submitted on behalf of engineers at The Paciello Group]
IBM comment 1 on 2.2.7 Interruptions (Minimum) #443
The introduction of a requirement at a AA level that is more stringent than an existing requirement at a AAA level does not follow the 'rules' of WCAG. IBM believes this SC has not been properly reviewed.
Editorial
IBM comment 3 on 2.2.7 Interruptions (Minimum) #445
mbgower commented on Oct 8 Is there a reason the SC does not link to the new definition of "change of content" or the existing definition of "emergency"?
Proposed Revision
(Level AA) [New]
A mechanism is available to postpone and suppress unnecessary interruptions and changes in content, unless they are initiated by the user or involve an emergency.
Unnecessary interruptions: Secondary information, pop-ups, or actions that are not part of the workflow sequence or the key purpose of the application. Note: Error, success, and warning messages; timeout notifications, live updates when the purpose of the application is monitoring are not unnecessary interruptions.