- From: Loretta Guarino Reid <lorettaguarino@google.com>
- Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 14:48:33 -0700
- To: mark.rogers@powermapper.com
- Cc: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CAHu5OWb0kefYfHcEB67Scmxtpz5WcMj-NsouRXgpG3X__z61HQ@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 4:17 AM, <noreply@w3.org> wrote: > Name: Mark Rogers > Email: mark.rogers@powermapper.com > Affiliation: PowerMapper Software > Document: TD > Item Number: H4 > Part of Item: Examples > Comment Type: technical > Summary of Issue: H4 Example 3 seems to fail the test procedure in F44 > Comment (Including rationale for any proposed change): > I can see what example 3 is trying to demonstrate, but if this example is > used verbatim I think it would lead to a failure (because the tab order > doesn't match the presentation order) > > Worth noting that H4 example 3 is also almost identical to F44 failure > example 1 (so it's pretty confusing) > > > > > Proposed Change: > Perhaps adding some CSS classes that imply layout is different from source > order would make this clearer: > > <a href="" class="topNav" tabindex="1">one</a> > <a href="" class="subNav" tabindex="2">three</a> > <a href="" class="topNav" tabindex="1">two</a> > <a href="" class="subNav" tabindex="2">four</a> > > The other alternative would be placing the code in table like example 1. > > ================================ Response from the Working Group ================================ Thank you for your comment; we agree with you. The first code example in Example 3 will be deleted, as it seems at odds with the stated purpose of the technique as noted in the description. Loretta Guarino Reid, WCAG WG Co-Chair Gregg Vanderheiden, WCAG WG Co-Chair Michael Cooper, WCAG WG Staff Contact On behalf of the WCAG Working Group
Received on Thursday, 24 May 2012 21:49:02 UTC