Re: H69 is not a sufficient technique for SC 2.4.1

Ok, that is a plausible explanation, but at the same time it is a global
statement as well. It should, in my view, be also available in:
1.  http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG-TECHS/intro.html
2.  http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG/

Thank you,
Devarshi




On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 6:18 PM, Loretta Guarino Reid <
lorettaguarino@google.com> wrote:

> On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Devarshi Pant <devarshipant@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> *Correction. Ignore the earlier post*
>> Summary of Issue: H69 is not a sufficient technique for SC 2.4.1
>> Comment (Including rationale for any proposed change):
>> H69 by itself will not be able to satisfy the accessibility needs of
>> sighted keyboard only users and hence is not sufficient for SC 2.4.1
>> (bypass blocks).
>> Proposed Change:
>> Remove it from the list of sufficient techniques and merge it with H42.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Devarshi
>>
>> ================================
> Response from the Working Group
> ================================
> The User Agent Notes for H69 discuss the native support for navigating by
> headings that is provided in Opera, and notes that for other browsers,
> plugins may be needed.   With all of our success criteria the assumption is
> that people needing special user agents (including AT or special plug-ins)
> will get and be using that type user agent (eg screen reader, or plug-in
> that allows keyboard navigation of properly marked up content, etc) .
>
> We have added a note to this effect to H69 that reads:
>
> NOTE:  All of our techniques assume that people needing special user
> agents (including AT or special plug-ins) will get and be using that type
> user agent (eg screen reader, or plug-in that allows keyboard navigation of
> properly marked up content, etc).
>
> 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
>