- From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
- Date: Sat, 5 Nov 2016 14:34:34 +0000
- To: public-mobile-a11y-tf@w3.org
On 05/11/2016 14:25, Patrick H. Lauke wrote: > On 05/11/2016 10:15, David MacDonald wrote: >> I've been looking at the non-interference proposal, >> >> https://github.com/chriscm2006/Mobile-A11y-Extension/blob/d9ecc74431ee5bef084b51256468838b1d9a773a/SCs/m14.md >> >> <https://github.com/chriscm2006/Mobile-A11y-Extension/blob/d9ecc74431ee5bef084b51256468838b1d9a773a/SCs/m14.md> >> >> >> it appears we may cover this in WCAG 2 in the conformance requirements. >> >> https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#cc5 <https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#cc5> > > For the touch scenario (where a native app can completely override Touch > AT's gesture recognition), this is arguably covered by Further, in the case of say a role="application" being indiscriminately (which then stops most AT functionality like reading keys, quick navigation keys, etc), arguably this clause 5 passes (as a keyboard+AT user can theoretically still use TAB/SHIFT+TAB to navigate around/out of the application section (so it also passes the high-level keyboard focus SC too), but AT functionality is nonetheless impeded. So perhaps clause 5 doesn't *completely* cover these cases, currently? P -- 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 Saturday, 5 November 2016 14:35:02 UTC