W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-comments-wcag20@w3.org > March 2013

Re: 2.4.1 Bypass Blocks - is it only required to meet one of the sufficient techniques?

From: Loretta Guarino Reid <lorettaguarino@google.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2013 13:49:31 -0700
Message-ID: <CAHu5OWYLGvax4BGQ2UyaPM2qk6wFpXrWTPBW5z-Ync+b88MF+g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Glenda Sims <glenda.sims@deque.com>
Cc: "public-comments-wcag20@w3.org" <public-comments-wcag20@w3.org>, "w3t-wai@w3.org" <wai@w3.org>
On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 6:20 PM, Glenda Sims <glenda.sims@deque.com> wrote:

> Dear WAI,
>
> I need clarification on 2.4.1 Bypass Blocks.  Can you tell me if my
> interpretation is correct:
>
> I think it is possible to pass WCAG 2.0 SC 2.4.1 by doing ONE of the
> following:
>
>
>    1. Creating links to skip blocks of repeated materials.
>    OR
>    2. Grouping blocks of repeated material in a way that can be skipped.
>
>
> In other words, I think you can pick a single technique from either of
> these options and pass 2.4.1.
>
> For example:
>
> *If Site "A" met "G1*:  Adding a link at the top of each page that goes
> directly to the main content area"  , *it would pass 2.4.1 *(even if Site
> A did not employ anything that address "grouping blocks of repeated
> material in a way that can be skipped".
>
>
> *OR*
>
> *If Site "B" met "H69: * Providing heading elements at the beginning of
> each section of content", *it would pass 2.4.1* (even if Site B did not
> employe anything that addresses "creating links to skip blocks of repeated
> materials".
>
>
> I know this is a very narrow interpretation of WCAG 2.0 SC 2.4.1, and with
> all my heart I recommend it is a best practice to employ both headings and
> skip links, but the question at hand is...do I "fail" a site on WCAG 2.0 SC
> 2.4.1 if it doesn't have sufficient techniques for both "creating links to
> skip blocks of repeated materials" and "grouping blocks of repeated
> material in a way that can be skipped"?
>
> Thanks in advance for your insight (as you might guess, the Deque
> Accessibility Experts are not in agreement in how to interpret this).
>
> Best,
> Glenda
>
>
>
> --
> glenda sims    |    deque.com    |    512.963.3773
>
> *web for everyone. web on everything.* -  w3 goals
>
Response from the Working Group
================================
It is only necessary to meet SC 2.4.1 using one of the sufficient
techniques listed in Understanding SC 2.4.1, that is, it is sufficient
either to create a link to skip blocks of repeated materials or to group
blocks of repeated material in a way that can be skipped. It is not
necessary to do both.

In fact you can also meet the success criterion without using either
technique, if you find another way of meeting the success criterion.
These are just two approaches that would be sufficient.

But you are correct, either one by itself would be sufficient.  We have
added the following text to the paragraph preceding the list of sufficient
techniques to make this clearer: "However, it is not necessary to use these
particular techniques. Any techniques, whether published by the WCAG group
or not, can be sufficient if a) they satisfy the Success Criterion and b)
all of the WCAG 2.0 conformance requirements have been met."



Loretta Guarino Reid, WCAG WG Co-Chair
Gregg Vanderheiden, WCAG WG Co-Chair
Michael Cooper, WCAG WG Staff Contact


On behalf of the WCAG Working Group
Received on Thursday, 28 March 2013 20:50:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 28 March 2013 20:50:04 UTC