Re: apparent contradiction

Hi Glen,

Thanks for your comment.

You are correct that a link is a user interface component. However, Success
Criterion 3.2.2 applies only to changes of context that result from a change to
the setting of a user interface component and Understanding Success Criterion 
3.2.2 [1] makes a distinction between activating a user interface component and 
changing it's setting as follows:

[snip]

Note: This Success Criterion covers changes in context due to changing the
setting of a control. Clicking on links or tabs in a tab control is activating
the control, not changing the setting of that control.

[end snip]

We do not feel that there is a contradiction in the current documentation.

Note, however, that opening a new window without warning the user would be a a 
failure under 3.2.5. Refer to F22: Failure of Success Criterion 3.2.5 due to 
opening windows that are not requested by the user [2].

Hope that helps,

-Ben

[1]
<http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/consistent-behavior-unpredictable-change.html>
[2] <http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20081211/F22>

-- 
Ben Caldwell | <caldwell@trace.wisc.edu>
Trace Research and Development Center <http://trace.wisc.edu>

WCAG 2.0 Comment Form wrote:
> Name: Glen Wallis Email: glen.wallis@opc.com.au Affiliation: Document: W2 
> Item Number: Success Criterion 3.2.2 Part of Item: Comment Type: question 
> Summary of Issue: apparent contradiction Comment (Including rationale for any
> proposed change): The definition of "user interface component" states (at
> Note 2) that this includes links. The definition of a "change of context"
> has, as an example "opening a new window" and yet the document "Understanding
> SC 3.2.2" states that giving users advanced warning when opening a new window
> is not required for conformance.
> 
> 
> 
> If a link is a user interface component and opening a new window is a change
> of context, does it not follow that opening a new window without warning the
> user is a failure under SC 3.2.2?
> 
> Proposed Change: clarify whether the definitions are correct and whether the
> "Understaning SC 3.2.2" document is incorrect.
> 
>

Received on Thursday, 12 March 2009 22:32:30 UTC