Re: Looking at SC 3.2.3 Consistent Navigation with "UI Context"

Hi Alex, 

GV3:  comments below

(I clipped out the parts of the dialog with Peter that you didn’t comment on to make this shorter) 

See comments on Navigational commands/mechanisms 
I am not sure - but I think that answers your questions/concerns below.

 

On Jul 14, 2012, at 4:06 AM, Alex Li wrote:

>  
>  
> From: Peter Korn [mailto:peter.korn@oracle.com] 
> Sent: Friday, July 13, 2012 1:18 PM
> To: Gregg Vanderheiden
> Cc: public-wcag2ict-tf@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Looking at SC 3.2.3 Consistent Navigation with "UI Context"
>  
> Gregg,
> ]
> 
> ...
>  
> 
> <PK> Thus if I have two windows in my UIC, and both of them contain navigation buttons (e.g. "Next" & "Previous"), and they were in different orders, they would not be in violation of this SC (with UIC). 
>  
> GV:  Not at that moment.  (This is what I call an extreme example that is unlikely and is constructed to test something -- but OK -- for the moment it would pass)    But when you open the window on another document tomorrow it would be a new UI Context because the information would  be different.  And at that point you would be in conflict with either instance one or instance two.
> 
> PK2: "Tomorrow"?  Using this thinking in the web world, if I have a single page web site, and if on one day the content is X and tomorrow the content is Y but in both days there is a block of content at the top - that is "repeated content" and so the SC applies.  That makes no sense in the web world.  Why should it make sense in the software world across multiple times I run a software application (e.g. once today and once tomorrow)?
>  
> GV2: Sure it does.  Think about it.   The purpose of the provision is to keep people from having to step through the same controls over and over. Whether that is stepping over them on pages that are next to each other -- or a page where the content keeps changing so they go back to the same url and have to step through the same controls is essentially the same.   So it makes perfect sense though for web pages you would usually have them on different pages -- so the SC is targeted that way.
> 
> PK3: OK.  I have a weather service page.  Only page on the site.  It has a block at the top of the page that is always there (ads ad such).  This page updates every 4 hours.  By your logic 3.2.3 applies to it, because it is a different page 4 hours from now.  Same logic for 2.4.1.  So both 3.2.3 and 2.4.1 apply.  
> 
> Presumably then a WCAG assessment couldn't be complete unless it is was carried out over multiple days to look for changes to all pages (particularly those that didn't otherwise share any navigation links with any other pages, and those that didn't otherwise share any blocks to bypass with any other pages) - in order to determine whether 3.2.3 and 2.4.1 should apply to them.
> 
> Yes, this is a highly contrived example.  But I see it as fundamentally the same thing as a single non-web application that is a document editor, for which you claim 3.2.3 and 2.4.1 apply because when the user chooses to edit a different document this single window becomes one of a set of windows and therefore 3.2.3/2.4.1 kick in.
> 
> AL: The SC is not meant to apply perpetually.  Think of a news site with navigation to the usual pages—Local, US,  World, Business, Sports, Entertainment, etc.  We cannot ask site designers to never change that order until the end of time.  At some point, they may want to shift Entertainment in-front-of Sports, for example.  The SC is only meant to apply to repeated navigational mechanisms within the same timeframe—ie you would still see Local, US, World, Business, Sports, and Entertainment in the same order on top when you go to the Sports page right now, assuming those same navigation stays. 


GV3: Good observation.    This shouldn’t prevent change over time.  But the items should not change from  moment to moment in the course of a day.   Even web pages are opened up one at a time sequentially -- so they are not open at the same time.   The user shouldn’t see things in a different order as the open different web pages -- or as they open different documents in a software program. 

> 
> 
> Second question: which outcome do you think we want?  Should the "Next" | "Prev" in showing non-modal window A while "Prev" | "Next" showing in non-modal window B be allowed or not?
>  
> GV:  clearly not -- and it isn't with either. 
>  
> This one is trickier than usual  (the whole UI Context - or any of our terms/concepts --  and software) because windows are used both for palettes - and navigation is the same for both.   But with repeated use - everything falls out and works.
> 
> PK2: But I find your repeated use construction very uncomfortable.  As I noted above, we don't use it in WCAG for web pages.  Why should that somehow make a block repeated for software when the exact same behavior doesn't make it so for web pages?  AND when we can address the criterion by using "top level frame" instead of UI Context?
>  
> GV2: not sure I see how TLC would work in key uses.   How would it work with a main window,  floating palettes and perhaps a non-modal dialog box?
> 
> PK3: So let's construct an example.  A photo viewing/editing application that also retrieves images directly from my camera or from an inserted memory card (I actually use an application just like this regularly with my Canon camera).  When I'm in the window that gives me a direct view of what's on the memory card in my camera over a USB connection, there is a "next photo" button and a "previous photo" button.  I have a slightly different window when this same application is looking at the memory card when it is inserted directly into my computer, but it also has a "next photo" and a "previous photo" pair of buttons.  Likewise when I'm looking at the photos in a directory on my hard drive: "next photo" and "previous photo" buttons.  Perhaps in the hard-drive-viewing case the "next photo" and "previous photo" buttons are in a palette that can optionally be torn off into its own top level frame.
> 
> AL: Before going into UI context and such, I have a more basic question.  What is navigational mechanisms in the context of documents and software UI?  The term is fairly basic in web content—the like of Local, US, World, Business, Sports, and Entertainment, etc in news page. 

GV3: Good question Alex.    They might differ a bit by platform -- 
For windows
	- arrow keys  (and modified arrow keys)
	- tab and shift tab
	- CTRL+TAB: Switch to the next child window of a Multiple Document Interface (MDI) program    {for example TABs as in 
	- ALT+F6: Switch between multiple windows in the same program (for example, when the Notepad Find dialog box is displayed, ALT+F6 switches between the Find dialog box and the main Notepad window)
	- ALT+TAB: Switch to another running program (Though this would navigate OUTSIDE the Product so could not be used for UIContext)

For my Mac they are basically the same except
	- ALT+TAB is  Command+TAB
	- ALT+F6 is  Command+`  (for switching between windows within and app including between main window and formatting palettes etc.)  

Not sure if this is all of them -  I am doing this mostly from memory 

>  	
> But what does that mean in a document. 

GV3:See above

> I know it is theoretically possible to create a bunch of different documents and all with the same links to jump to each other. 

GV3:Those would not qualify.  Activating a link is an action and takes you to a new context.   

> But, A—people don’t do that.  B—are we really expecting somebody to who put these links to his documents to change the relative order of all the other documents if he changes the order in one of those documents?  That sounds absurd.  Fact is, A—repeated navigational mechanism rarely occurs in the context of documents; B—A “set of documents” does not make much sense either.  How can independent testers look at two different documents and conclude that they belong the same “set”?  People just don’t organize documents like a websites.

GV3: I'm not sure what you are referring to -- but if you mean the links technique you are talking  about above -- that is totally different than anything being proposed and specifically is not allowed by the definition of UIC.  

>  
> I don’t know what make a mechanism “navigational” vs. “non-navigational”.  Of course, it does not help that there is no definition in WCAG 2.0 because the concept is easier to understand within that context.  The first impression for me is that navigational mechanism cannot being executing anything. 

GV3: absolutely correct. 

> What we see in Office’s ribbon, for example, are there to do something like change color of the font, add a bullet list, or indent a paragraph, etc.  I don’t see how anybody can call indenting a paragraph a navigational action. 

GV3:and it isn't.

> Maybe the tab on top of the ribbon can be considered navigational in nature or much of the UI in Windows Explorer.  Not so sure about others.

GV3: right - if you can move between the tabs without having to click on them or use the spacebar or return to activate them.    
>