W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-wcag-teamb@w3.org > March 2007

RE: RE: SC 2.4.6 wording

From: Gregg Vanderheiden <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2007 21:56:12 -0600
To: "'Loretta Guarino Reid'" <lorettaguarino@google.com>, "'Sean Hayes'" <Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com>
Cc: "'Gez Lemon'" <gez.lemon@gmail.com>, "'Slatin, John M'" <john_slatin@austin.utexas.edu>, "'TeamB'" <public-wcag-teamb@w3.org>
Message-ID: <004f01c75eda$38a6b780$0f6fa8c0@NC84301>

Side note

Is there only one 'programmatically determined' reading order?  Seems like
there could be multiple in a table for example.

If you mean the order that the code appears in the source file then that may
not be the order that is presented or even a logical presentation order.

When you think cross technology this one gets very complicated.

 -- ------------------------------
Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-wcag-teamb-request@w3.org
> [mailto:public-wcag-teamb-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of
> Loretta Guarino Reid
> Sent: Sunday, March 04, 2007 7:43 PM
> To: Sean Hayes
> Cc: Gez Lemon; Slatin, John M; TeamB
> Subject: Re: RE: SC 2.4.6 wording
> Let me take another crack at the wording of SC 2.4.6. Is this
> getting any closer to what we mean?
> 1.3.3 Meaningful Sequence: When the sequence in which content
> is presented affects its meaning, when the content is
> navigated sequentially, the interactive components within
> that content receive focus in an order that is consistent
> with the programmatically-determined reading order.
> (This is still very difficult to parse; suggestions for
> clearer wording welcome...)
Received on Monday, 5 March 2007 03:56:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:15:25 UTC