Regarding F2: Failure of Success Criterion 1.3.1 - example 3

I am not entirely sure I understand the failure here. In my opinion, there ought to be exceptions for cases where CSS is used to change font-weight for purely aesthetic reasons. It’s just like making a different choice of font, one that is ‘bolder’, and no semantic information is intended to be conveyed, and no emphasis is intended.

I have an example in the CSS that is used to style h1 elements on all pages in my website https://www.skyeshepherdhuts.co.uk/ - See also https://www.skyeshepherdhuts.co.uk/main.css for the relevant CSS used to style an h1. The font-weight applied to an h1 is purely for aesthetic reasons, yet because of a particular interpretation of the possible failures of Success Criterion 1.3.1, especially as illustrated by example 3, an accessibility checking tool which I use regularly, "PowerMapper", demands that I enclose the h1 in <strong> tags. As far as I can see it, for me to do so would be exactly the opposite of conveying the _right_ semantic intent regarding emphasis, or the lack of it.

Do you think that example three, and maybe also various pieces of introductory text, should be qualified to say something roughly like "_where emphasis is intended_, semantic markup should be used, by…" ?

What do you think?

Cecil Ward

Received on Friday, 3 January 2025 00:48:18 UTC