“For example, a large screen view with a mega menu, more content, and more complicated interface would not be a conforming alternative to a view optimized for small screen because the two have different functionality.” I think we need a clearer example (or to drop the example). · Mega menus can easily be better than a mobile equivalent. For example, sites that have a mega menu for wide-screens often create a hamburger menu for small screens, then forget to properly hide the options at mobile size. · If the small screen version is missing content isn’t that is also a problem? I think that case is covered in note 2. · We’d need to define complex interface, good luck! ;-) How about taking a different tack: “Sometimes specifically optimized views are delivered to the user agent based on screen size, device type, etc. A WCAG conforming view linked from such an optimized view could only be considered a conforming alternative if it has equivalent content and functionality as the optimized view. The website should not assume users have access to alternative devices.” Jon: The term mega-menu implies that there is a menu with very large drop-downs, usually with at least a dozen options per drop-down in multiple columns. Visually the drop-downs often cover most of the page, so they are not very mobile friendly without being made responsive. A (good) example of a mega-menu: https://adobe-accessibility.github.io/Accessible-Mega-Menu/ Cheers, -Alastair
Received on Wednesday, 29 June 2016 13:43:46 UTC