RE: Conforming alternative for mobile should not be Desktop

Ø  David replied:

Ø  > This is what the entire 75 email thread to the list has been about for me, summed up in one sentence.

[Alistair wrote]

Ø  Ok, well let’s not confuse the issue with talking about alternate versions then!

Ø  In a responsive site you would not get a link to a ‘desktop’ version. If there is a link, it is an alternative version, and a different kettle of fish.



Right, thank you Alistair, on the list and when we started out the call today David was talking about a mobile site with a link to a non-responsive desktop site – that is completely different than a responsive site which would be the same site on both devices but with different responses.



About two minutes before the Mobile TF call ended David brought up the concept of something that was inaccessible at a particular breakpoint without a link to an alternative.  In that case he said something might be not displayed with display:none etc.  If it wasn’t displayed and the display item was not accessible at a breakpoint then yes, of course I agree it’s a failure – but that’s not what the 70 messages have been about.



Jonathan

Jonathan Avila
Chief Accessibility Officer
SSB BART Group
jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com<mailto:jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com>
703.637.8957 (Office)

Visit us online: Website<http://www.ssbbartgroup.com/> | Twitter<https://twitter.com/SSBBARTGroup> | Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/ssbbartgroup> | Linkedin<https://www.linkedin.com/company/355266?trk=tyah> | Blog<http://www.ssbbartgroup.com/blog/>
Check out our Digital Accessibility Webinars!<http://www.ssbbartgroup.com/webinars/>

From: Alastair Campbell [mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2016 12:18 PM
To: David MacDonald
Cc: WCAG; public-mobile-a11y-tf@w3.org
Subject: Re: Conforming alternative for mobile should not be Desktop


I wrote:

>>If you provide *one website* with *multiple breakpoints*, it has to meet WCAG 2.0/2.1 at *all breakpoints*. If you swap in a different menu at a different screensize, each ‘version’ has to meet WCAG.



David replied:

> This is what the entire 75 email thread to the list has been about for me, summed up in one sentence.



Ok, well let’s not confuse the issue with talking about alternate versions then!



In a responsive site you would not get a link to a ‘desktop’ version. If there is a link, it is an alternative version, and a different kettle of fish.



In my mind this is already covered by the concept of accessibility supported, as small/touch screen devices are common, therefore should be included.



-Alastair