- From: Christophe Strobbe <Christophe.Strobbe@esat.kuleuven.be>
- Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 21:59:45 +0200
- To: public-wcag-teamc@w3.org
<comment> The reviewer writes that Failure 1 [www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20060427/Overview.html#F1] prohibits CSS layout that remove elements from the document flow, and that it even requires that presentation order matches source order. He can't agree with that. </comment> <discussion> This comment results from a misunderstanding of the failure; this only prohibits *CSS layouts that change the meaning* of the content. Using CSS to position a navigation bar at the end of the source code to appear at the top does not consitute a change in *meaning*. We could replace the last sentence of the description with "Thus, it is important not to rely on CSS for a visual-only layout which differs from the source code for those parts of the source code where the sequence affects the meaning." or "Thus, it is important not to rely on CSS to visually position content in a meaningful sequence if this sequence results in a meaning that is different from the programmatically determined reading order." (The example for this failure also fails SC 1.3.1.) </discussion> <older_issues> None found. (Issue 1789 was about the priority level of this SC but said nothing about CSS or positioning.) </older_issues> <proposed_response> Failure 1 does not prohibit CSS layouts generally: it only prohibits CSS layouts that change the meaning of the content. For example, positioning a navigation bar does not change the mearning of the content. + Add whatever we decide to change about the failure description. </proposed_response> Regards, Christophe
Received on Monday, 12 June 2006 19:59:52 UTC