- From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
- Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 19:54:05 +0100
- To: David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
- Cc: "public-mobile-a11y-tf@w3.org" <public-mobile-a11y-tf@w3.org>
Actually, on first reading I actually completely missed David's point, so disregard this. P On 23/05/2016 19:51, Patrick H. Lauke wrote: > How about, instead, changing/expanding the meaning of "keyboard" to also > mean that things can be activated with two-step "set focus to it and > then activate it" (something that I believe was discussed at some point, > but not pinned down) in 2.1.1 (though I know we can't modify core WCAG > 2, but can we write this up as a note?) > > Because then, 2.1.1 would cover all aspects of this device manipulation > SC as well (so ANY functionality must be available using > keyboard/sequential navigation - so anything that can be triggered by > physical buttons, pressure touch, shaking of the device, pull to refresh > gestures, etc must also be actionable this way)? > > P > > > > On 23/05/2016 17:20, David MacDonald wrote: >> It is clear under WCAG 2.1.1 that every function has to be keyboard >> enabled. I think however we may want to consider going further for the >> mobile requirement. >> >> Keyboard functionality is not fully implemented on iOS and users >> generally reserve keyboard to input of volumes of text rather than >> navigation. >> I've removed the "or keyboard" part out, since its covered in 2.1.1 and >> left it as follows. >> >> ==== >> >> 2.6 [Proposed New MOBILE Success Criteria] Device manipulation: When >> device manipulation gestures are provided, touch operable alternative >> control options are available. (Level AA) >> Note: see also 2.1.1 for keyboard requirements. >> >> ===== >> >> For mobile, having a touch alternative is preferable to a keyboard >> alternative, but this proposed SC along with the existing 2.1.1 will >> require both... this may seem like a lot but I think it is worth >> bringing to the the larger group. This SC is to help dexterity >> disabilities, not blindness. Most plind people are used to shaking and >> tilting their devices (i.e., blind square) >> >> We should maybe do some further study asking organizations working with >> people with dexterity problems who have mounted mobile devices whether >> the keyboard requirement of 2.1.1 would be sufficient or whether having >> a touch alternative to manipulatipn should be required. >> >> Cheers, >> David MacDonald >> >> >> >> *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.* >> >> Tel: 613.235.4902 >> >> LinkedIn >> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100> >> >> twitter.com/davidmacd <http://twitter.com/davidmacd> >> >> GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald> >> >> www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/> >> >> >> >> / Adapting the web to *all* users/ >> >> / Including those with disabilities/ >> >> If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy >> <http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html> >> >> On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 9:35 PM, Patrick H. Lauke >> <redux@splintered.co.uk <mailto:redux@splintered.co.uk>> wrote: >> >> On 19/05/2016 23:09, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote: >> >> Well - the keyboard interface provision ensures that there is >> always at >> least that method (built in or connected keyboard operation) for >> operating things - that will work for people who don’t have >> fine (or >> even any real ) pointing ability. >> >> >> Then isn't the same provision also covering all other manners of >> device manipulation? Shaking, tilting, etc? i.e. is the entire SC >> superfluous because of the keyboard interface provision? (which, as >> a side note, I assume also includes the more general concepts like >> moving focus/activating a la VoiceOver/TalkBack ? I vaguely remember >> this being discussed at some point, but beyond discussion points at >> >> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/mobile-a11y-tf/wiki/Keyboard_Access/Modality_Independent_Control/IndieUI >> >> can't find a definitive resolution) >> >> But for those who can point but not well, and for people with >> cognitive >> disabilities that might be confused with overloaded pointing >> options - >> it could be very helpful to have these find pointing movement >> options >> be real options and not the only way. >> >> >> So now I'm wondering if it's really an SC, or more of a nice-to-have >> best practice technique (which doesn't necessarily have hard >> pass/fails), more suitable for publication as a note or >> similar...but that probably derails the whole argument further. >> >> P >> >> -- >> Patrick H. Lauke >> >> www.splintered.co.uk <http://www.splintered.co.uk> | >> https://github.com/patrickhlauke >> http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com >> twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke >> >> >> > > -- Patrick H. Lauke www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
Received on Monday, 23 May 2016 18:54:31 UTC