Re: Rough draft of some success criteria for a extension guideline "Touch accessible"

On 18/08/2015 16:13, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:
> This problem should not be a problem if WCAG   “keyboard interface”
>   provision is followed. .
>
> If all functionality can be achieved from the keyboard interface - then
> the screen reader could use that method for achieving the function -
> rather than needing to worry about knowing or being able to perform the
> new gesture
>
> No?

Indeed, yes. For simplicity, leaving gestures out of these guidelines 
completely (treating them as a nice-to-have shortcut for non-AT users), 
and instead ensuring that all functionality can also be activated with a 
keyboard/keyboard-like interface, would suffice.

One side note: for native applications (rather than HTML/CSS/JS) the 
situation may be different. I admit to not having any experience here 
about what's possible to do when making a native app (if there is a way 
to somehow bind to gestures that would still work when touch-AT is 
running). But again, if the thorny issue of gestures is simply left out 
(or some note added to the keyboard/keyboard-like SCs that specifically 
call out for gesture commands to also be available in alternative, 
keyboard-friendly way), that should be best.

P
-- 
Patrick H. Lauke

www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com
twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke

Received on Tuesday, 18 August 2015 15:23:58 UTC