W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-comments-wcag20@w3.org > April 2014

Re: 1.3.1 Info & Relationships - are ARIA landmarks required?

From: Glenda Sims <glenda.sims@deque.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 12:23:08 -0500
Message-ID: <CAH2ngESoN-W76_Y1Jtn8ky-TxzMiXhcY=mQthtNgJk0Zm87A2w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org>
Cc: public-comments-wcag20@w3.org, wai@w3.org
Problem is...this particular success criteria (1.3.1) is so broadly
written..that I have folks who are interpreting that "*Info and
Relationships:* Information,
and relationships<http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/content-structure-separation-programmatic.html#relationshipsdef>
through presentation<http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/content-structure-separation-programmatic.html#presentationdef>
be programmatically
are available in text. (Level A)"

means that ARIA landmarks are required...to indicate to screen reader users
where the header is, where the footer is, where the navigation is, where
the main content is.  And that missing ARIA landmarks is a violation of
1.3.1 (unless you've got an old fashioned hidden off-screen heading
structure to tell you...Banner, Navigation, Footer...etc.")

I see their point...but I also think that is an over interpretation of what
was intended by 1.3.1.

So...I'm not looking at techniques...I'm looking at the normative part of
WCAG 2.0 SC 1.3.1.  So based on that...can you tell me if ARIA Landmarks
are required to indicate what part of the page is a banner, navigation,
main, footer?  Or...perhaps it would be better for me to ask...would WAI
add a Failure for 1.3.1 saying parts of a page need to be marked up with
one of the following:

   1. ARIA Landmarks
   2. HTML5 Sectioning Elements
   3. Headings describing this section of the page
   4. Text describing the section of a page


On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 11:59 AM, Shawn Henry <shawn@w3.org> wrote:

> Hi Glenda,
> The information to support it is at <http://www.w3.org/TR/
> UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/understanding-techniques.html>, which includes:
> * The basis for determining conformance to WCAG 2.0 is the success
> criteria from the WCAG 2.0 standard—not the techniques.
> * Techniques are informative—that means they are not required.
> * There may be other ways to meet success criteria besides the sufficient
> techniques in W3C's Techniques for WCAG 2.0 document.
> * Web content does not have to use W3C's published techniques in order to
> conform to WCAG 2.0.
> Best,
> ~Shawn
> -----
> Shawn Lawton Henry
> W3C Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI)
> Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)
> e-mail: shawn@w3.org
> phone: +1.617.395.7664
> about: http://www.w3.org/People/Shawn/
> On 4/22/2014 11:35 AM, Glenda Sims wrote:
>> Dear WAI,
>> I need clarification on *2.3.1 Info & Relationships*.  Can you tell me if
>> my interpretation is correct:
>>     I think it is possible to pass WCAG 2.0 SC 1.3.1 without using ARIA
>> landmarks.  As much as I love ARIA landmarks...I do not think they are
>> required in WCAG 2.0.
>>     I always recommend them, but I don't currently have my team call a
>> WCAG 2.0  violation on SC 1.3.1 if ARIA landmarks are missing.
>> Thanks in advance for your insight (as you might guess, the Deque
>> Accessibility Experts are not in agreement in how to interpret this).
>> Best,
>> Glenda
>> --
>> glenda sims    | deque.com <http://deque.com>    |512.963.3773
>> /web for everyone. web on everything./ -  w3 goals

glenda sims    |    deque.com    |    512.963.3773

*web for everyone. web on everything.* -  w3 goals
Received on Tuesday, 22 April 2014 17:23:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:15:00 UTC