W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2006

Re: [action] Reasons for not moving SC 3.2.2 up to level 1

From: Gez Lemon <gez.lemon@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2006 20:56:19 +0000
Message-ID: <e2a28a920601091256r6567d141l@mail.gmail.com>
To: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>

On 09/01/06, Becky Gibson <Becky_Gibson@notesdev.ibm.com> wrote:

<blockquote>
Alex and I took an action item regarding success criterion 3.2.2:
Alex and Becky provide reasons why moving 3.2.2 to level 1 would cause
problems for web application development. Due 01/12/06.

We both have concerns about moving this to level 1 with respect to
blocking further technologies or that someone will interpret change of
context more strictly.  Here are some application examples which would not
be allowed at level 1 if this success criterion was moved:
</blockquote>

All of the reasons cited would have a significant impact on users with
cognitive problems, which is a bit concerning as guideline 3 is surely
directed at helping people with cognitive problems? In my opinion,
this just adds weight to Lisa's suggestion to drop guideline 3 and
stop pretending we're addressing the needs of users with cognitive
problems [1], as they're obviously not being considered here.

Another problem I have with this proposal is that the success
criterion is achievable though markup, scripting, or other
technologies that interact with or enable access through user agents,
including assistive technologies, and can reasonably be applied to all
web resources. So why wouldn't it be appropriate at level 1 in a
guideline that is supposed to address the needs of people with
cognitive problems?

<blockquote>
-automatic movement of focus to the next entry field when entering
data into a form.  For example, automatically moving the cursor
from the area code field to the local code field when entering a
US phone number.
</blockquote>

Automatically moving the focus to the next entry field when entering
data is not the expected behaviour on the web. If this kind of
functionality is important for a web application, then it should be
enabled through settings so that users can decide if they want that
kind of behaviour. If a user chooses that option, it couldn't be
considered an accessibility problem, but ensures that developers at
least take care to ensure their applications are understandable.

<blockquote>
- using a drop down list to implement a list of links.  For a trained
user, a drop down list containing a list of links with an onchange
event to navigate to the selected link could be a faster way to
navigate a repetitive process.
</blockquote>

What kind of training is required to overcome a select box with 3
items, and size="3"? Why, in a guideline aimed at people with
cognitive problems, are we arguing that trained users should take
precedence? We don't make the same type of objections for people with
sensory or mobility impairments, so why for people with cognitive
problems?

I've not quoted any others, as their impact on people with cognitive
problems is obvious.

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2006JanMar/0007.html

Best regards,

Gez

--
_____________________________
Supplement your vitamins
http://juicystudio.com
Received on Monday, 9 January 2006 20:56:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:42 GMT