W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > July to September 2014

Re: SC failure for opening new window without prior notice ?

From: Christophe Strobbe <strobbe@hdm-stuttgart.de>
Date: Wed, 09 Jul 2014 14:58:59 +0200
Message-ID: <53BD3C93.1090905@hdm-stuttgart.de>
CC: "w3c-wai-gl@w3.org" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>

On 9/07/2014 14:53, Steve Faulkner wrote:
> as a /user/ you get nothing,
> points to it being usability issue

If an issue disproportionately affects persons with disabilities, it is
not just a usability issue. When you use magnification and a new screen
pops up outside the magnified area, and you don't notice it because it's
outside that area, isn't that an accessibility issue?

Best regards,

Christophe

>
> --
>
> Regards
>
> SteveF
> HTML 5.1 <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/>
>
>
> On 9 July 2014 13:44, Christophe Strobbe <strobbe@hdm-stuttgart.de
> <mailto:strobbe@hdm-stuttgart.de>> wrote:
>
>
>
>     On 9/07/2014 13:48, Hoffman, Allen wrote:
>>
>>     Heuristically speaking:
>>
>>     Why wouldn’t a blind user know a new window was opened? 
>>
>>      
>>
>>     In at least three screen readers I use I don’t seem to miss this
>>     information. 
>>
>>      
>>
>>     Standardsly speaking:
>>
>>     The window handle is available for assistive technology use from
>>     the OS or user-agent using the OS, so I’m not clear why this is a
>>     content issue and not a user-agent issue, especially since how
>>     such windows are handled is nearly universally configurable now
>>     in browsers.  Since the user-agent knows, the information is
>>     obviously available, so the assistive technology should be able
>>     to pick this up easily enough without specific additional content
>>     cues.
>>
>>
>>      
>>
>>     What am I missing?
>>
>
>     If you argue only from the point of view of screen readers, you
>     miss all other users with disabilities; screen reader users
>     represent a minority of people with disabilities. That's why I
>     checked what 7 different browsers do with 'target="_blank"'; as a
>     sighted keyboard user, for example, you get exactly nothing. As a
>     magnifier user, you get nothing.
>
>     Best regards,
>
>     Christophe
>
>
>>      
>>
>>      
>>
>>      
>>
>>      
>>
>>      
>>
>>     *From:*RichardWarren [mailto:richard.warren@userite.com]
>>     *Sent:* Wednesday, July 09, 2014 7:05 AM
>>     *To:* Aurélien Levy; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org <mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
>>     *Subject:* Re: SC failure for opening new window without prior
>>     notice ?
>>
>>      
>>
>>     Aurelien,
>>
>>      
>>
>>     When a blind user activates a link that opens a new window
>>     without prior warning they do not know that a new window has been
>>     opened and thus their “browser history” renewed. Thus when they
>>     press the key for their screen reader to go back to the previous
>>     page nothing happens. Eventually they learn that we need to
>>     “close the current window” if we want to go back. However if they
>>     have followed as series of “blank-targets” this becomes a very
>>     hit-or-miss approach.
>>
>>      
>>
>>     So in practical terms target="_blank" without a warning is a
>>     barrier and thus a failure of WCAG level A
>>
>>      
>>
>>     SC 3.2.2 seems to cover this adequately. for example when it
>>     talks about form submission buttons being clearly marked as such,
>>     after all a form submission button is just a link to another page
>>     or state just as a target=”_blank”. The intention is clear here
>>     and it really is not practicable to provide examples of every
>>     possible situation where a change of context might be introduced.
>>     The over-riding essential is that the page operates in a
>>     predictable manner.
>>
>>      
>>
>>     Richard
>>
>>      
>>
>>      
>>
>>      
>>
>>     *From:*Aurélien Levy <mailto:aurelien.levy@temesis.com>
>>
>>     *Sent:*Wednesday, July 09, 2014 11:10 AM
>>
>>     *To:*w3c-wai-gl@w3.org <mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
>>
>>     *Subject:*Re: SC failure for opening new window without prior
>>     notice ?
>>
>>      
>>
>>
>>
>>     Based on F37 alone, we cannot definitively conclude whether
>>     target="_blank" without a warning is a failure. It is just not
>>     part of *this* failure. In the absence of failure descriptions
>>     that specifically mention Aurélien's case, we have only the
>>     success criteria to go by. Whether this case fails SC 3.2.2
>>     hinges on the interpretation of "changing the setting of any user
>>     interface component": does activating a link constitute a change
>>     in a setting? A link is a UI component, but does activating it
>>     constitute a change in its setting? (Nothing that you can
>>     retrieve from the DOM, as far as I know, unlike certain
>>     properties of form fields.) So it seems hard to argue that
>>     Aurélien's example fails SC 3.2.2.
>>
>>     However, the code fails SC3.2.5; there is even a failure for
>>     this: <http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20140408/F22>
>>     <http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20140408/F22>.
>>
>>     Best regards,
>>
>>     Christophe
>>
>>     I agree with that but it strange because the understanding of
>>     3.2.5 state :
>>
>>     *Change on Request:* Changes of context
>>     <http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/consistent-behavior-no-extreme-changes-context.html#context-changedef>
>>     are initiated only by user request or a mechanism
>>     <http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/consistent-behavior-no-extreme-changes-context.html#mechanismdef>
>>     is available to turn off such changes. (Level AAA)
>>
>>     and we have this /Note: /Clicking on a link is an example of an
>>     action that is "initiated only by user request."
>>
>>     So nothing ask about prior warning. It may be better to have
>>     something like :
>>     *Change on Request:* Changes of context
>>     <http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/consistent-behavior-no-extreme-changes-context.html#context-changedef>
>>     are initiated only by user request *with a prior warning* or a
>>     mechanism
>>     <http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/consistent-behavior-no-extreme-changes-context.html#mechanismdef>
>>     is available to turn off such changes. (Level AAA)
>>     or
>>     *Change on Request:* Changes of context
>>     <http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/consistent-behavior-no-extreme-changes-context.html#context-changedef>
>>     are initiated only by user request or a mechanism
>>     <http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/consistent-behavior-no-extreme-changes-context.html#mechanismdef>
>>     is available to turn off*, warn the the user *of such changes.
>>     (Level AAA)
>>
>>     Regarding SC 2.4.4 I ask the question because there is an example
>>     of using title to warn the user of opening new windows
>>     http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20140408/H33 so if
>>     not warning the user is not a failure of SC 2.4.4 maybe it's best
>>     to change this example as well
>>
>>     Aurélien
>>
>>
>>      
>>
>>     Richard Warren
>>     Technical Manager
>>     Website Auditing Limited (Userite)
>>     http://www.userite.com
>>
>>
>>      
>>
>
>
>     -- 
>     Christophe Strobbe
>     Akademischer Mitarbeiter
>     Adaptive User Interfaces Research Group
>     Hochschule der Medien
>     Nobelstraße 10
>     70569 Stuttgart
>     Tel. +49 711 8923 2749 <tel:%2B49%20711%208923%202749>
>
>     "La vie est courte, hélas! et je n'ai pas encore lu tous mes livres!" (d'après Mallarmé).
>
>


-- 
Christophe Strobbe
Akademischer Mitarbeiter
Adaptive User Interfaces Research Group
Hochschule der Medien
Nobelstraße 10
70569 Stuttgart
Tel. +49 711 8923 2749

"La vie est courte, hélas! et je n'ai pas encore lu tous mes livres!" (d'après Mallarmé).
Received on Wednesday, 9 July 2014 12:59:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:34:15 UTC