Re: Techniques doc - questions and suggestions

Hi Sailesh and all,

On 7/15/15, Sailesh Panchang <spanchang02@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Greetings All,
> 1. At the end of techniques for SC 3.3.2 there is a note:
> "Note: The techniques at the end of the above list should be considered
> "last resort" and only used when the other techniques cannot be applied to
> the page.
> The earlier techniques are preferred because they increase accessibility to
> a wider user group".
>
> Apparently, this is not true for techniques for other SCs, as it is placed
> only after 3.3.2?

I did a quick search, which concurs with your findings.

The query:
+"last resort" site:w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20

brings up the following:
http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/minimize-error-cues.html
http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/complete
http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/complete.html

Best Regards,
Laura

On 7/15/15, Sailesh Panchang <spanchang02@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Greetings All,
> 1. At the end of techniques for SC 3.3.2 there is a note:
> "Note: The techniques at the end of the above list should be considered
> "last resort" and only used when the other techniques cannot be applied to
> the page.
> The earlier techniques are preferred because they increase accessibility to
> a wider user group".
>
> Apparently, this is not true for techniques for other SCs, as it is placed
> only after 3.3.2?
>
> 2. The list of techniques displayed (when one selects all technologies)
> includes Flash, Silverlight, PDF etc. So when using Flash or PDFs, only
> techniques for those technologies apply even though they appear lower down
> the list.
> So the above note needs to be reviewed and / or techniques should be grouped
> by technologies. While grouping, it may be reasonable to group general ,
> HTML, ARIA, CSS, scripting techniques together. But for PDF techniques, only
> general ones may be considered not ARIA or CSS etc so these should not be
> grouped.
>
> 3. Techniques for some SCs are organized by situation (like SC 1.1.1, 1.3.1
> and  it is not so for many other SCs.
> Does this  need to be reviewed to make the presentation of techniques more
> consistent?
> For instance even for SC 3.3.2, H90, Flash10 and PDF apply only when
> required fields in a form are distinguished from those that are not. So the
> situation may read: When required fields need to be identified" or the like,
> and then grouped by technologies.
>
> Maybe a review needs to be done, say for only Level A SCs at first? I could
> help if you wish.
> Thanks,
> Sailesh Panchang

Received on Wednesday, 15 July 2015 15:26:43 UTC