W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > April to June 2005

3.2 Proposal version 2

From: Li, Alex <alex.li@sap.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 16:27:33 +0200
Message-ID: <6D259B2A9E733043B2D8567C82C2FEF9166D9CBD@uspalx23.pal.sap.corp>
To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>

Hi all,

This is an update of 3.2 proposal from last week.  All below proposals
are related "extreme change of context".  The initial proposals of the
following received split voting results.  I hope we can get back on
track with the following.  The primary to do is to develop a better
term, definition, and examples for "extreme change of context".

Proposed Change
<gl>GL 3.2</gl>

<proposed>Ensure that users can predict the placement and behavior of

<current>Organize content consistently from "page to page" and make
interactive components behave in predictable ways.</current>

<rationale>Please see issue 1509</rationale>

<sc>L1 SC1</sc>

<proposed>Any extreme change of context is implemented in a manner that
can be programmatically identified.</proposed>

<current>Any extreme change of context is implemented in a manner that
can be programmatically identified.</current>


No change.  But the term, definition, and examples of "extreme change of
context" need adjustment.  Examples and definition should include: 

John's Input:
Auto-refresh that takes you to the top of the page so screen reader
users have to listen to the whole thing again to get back to where they

Auto-redirect that goes somewhere you didn't intend to go before you've
had time to read the content on the original page you land on 

Auto-submit forms that take you to a different page before you were
ready (might be covered under 2.5 avoid error where we require ability
to review before submitting) 

Automatically changing focus to next form control (e.g., entering a
phone number or SSN into 3 spearate fields); again this one might be a
2.5 issue (since it makes error recovery difficult) 

I think there was also agreement that what we're really talking about
are extreme changes of focus that are not intentionally initaited by the
user. ... Gregg pointed out if we never allow *any* extreme change of
context users will never get off the home page! 

Mike's input:
restate current SC as ~'no extreme content changes occur without user
invocation' or some such. intent is to disallow popups, popovers, focus
stealing, or content updates that are not in response to user action. 

we'll need to clarify what 'extreme' is. so tickers etc are allowable
insofar as the change of the content is expected and of defined scope or
some such. 

Issue 1510 needs clarification.


<sc>L2 SC5</sc>

<proposed>Explicit notice is given in advance of any extreme change of

<current>Explicit notice is given in advance of any extreme change of

<rationale>No change.  Issue 1515 needs clarification.</rationale>

<sc>L2 SC6</sc>

<proposed>Text that describes the destination of each link is

<current>The destination of each link is identified through words or
phrases that either occur in the link or can be programmatically

<rationale>See issue 1516 </rationale>

Alex Li 
Accessibility Program Manager
SAP Labs, Inc.
Ronald Reagan Building
1300 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, Suite 600
Washington, DC 20004
T (202) 312-3801
F (202) 312-3600
M (202) 492-4592 
mailto: alex.li@sap.com
http://www.sap.com <http://www.sap.com/> 

This e-mail is confidential and may contain privileged information. If
you are not the addressee it may be unlawful for you to read, copy,
distribute, disclose or otherwise use the information in this e-mail. If
you are not the intended recipient please notify us immediately.
Received on Friday, 10 June 2005 14:28:50 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 21:07:40 UTC