- From: Lee Roberts <uce@roserockdesign.com>
- Date: Sun, 28 Apr 2002 12:21:13 -0500
- To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <NFBBJHFEOLAGEICMIMBPMEKDCEAA.uce@roserockdesign.com>
I'm thinking that a search function would fall more into 5.4 since it is basically a user interface. A search function would not fall into 4.3 simply because it would not necessarily be a complex operation, no fashion of abbreviated, and there are no summaries or definitions. What would be the alternative to a search function? Well, I haven't looked in quite some time now, but search engines used to have a help page. On the help page the engine provided examples on how to do various searches. I've seen too many times where a search wouldn't accept the pipe as an OR statement. I've also seen searches that don't accept the plus sign for AND searches. Therefore, I would recommend that we require a link to a help page so that people can understand how the searches are performed and what declarations can be used to handle AND, NOT, NOR, and OR searhes. Thanks, Lee In WCAG 1.0 there was 13.7 If search functions are provided, enable different types of searches for different skill levels and preferences. [Priority 3] this doesn’t appear specifically in 2.0 this sounds like it should be part of either OPERABLE or UNDERSTANDABLE. I think it goes in understandable since it sounds like the different forms are provided because a person wouldn’t understand a more complex form. It also doesn’t sound like a high level checkpoint with level 1 criteria, but rather a success strategy under another. I was thinking it was 4.3 ish. ( Checkpoint 4.3 [3.5] Annotate complex, abbreviated, or unfamiliar information with summaries and definitions But instead it might be 5.4. Checkpoint 5.4 Ensure that user interfaces are accessible or provide an accessible alternative. If your search function is not clear and simple and easy to operate, then you should provide an alternative that is.
Received on Sunday, 28 April 2002 13:29:23 UTC