Re: About tests 37-41 (headers)

Thank you for your messages. However some questions are still unanswered.

> So, my questions are:
>
> 1.- Is there a way to declare "no skipping headers" as "good practice" 
> or "good to have, but not required" within WCAG 2.0? What name does WCAG 
> 2.0 give for this things which "are good to have, but not required"? 
> WCAG 1.0 already stated that not skipping levels was recommended:
>
> <blockquote cite="http://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG10-HTML-TECHS/#document-headers"> 
> Since some users skim through a document by navigating its headings, it is 
> important to use them appropriately to convey document structure. Users 
> should order heading elements properly. For example, in HTML, H2 elements 
> should follow H1 elements, H3 elements should follow H2 elements, etc. 
> Content developers should not "skip" levels (e.g., H1 directly to H3). 
> </blockquote>
>
> 2.- I still think that, in a maximum accessibility level (namely AAA), 
> documents should not skip headings because many users may think "that 
> the structure of the document has not been properly thought through" (as 
> Chris said) Why this is now not required nor (at least) recommended for
> level 3?
>
> 3.- Why will you allow that AAA documents might have undesirable conditions 
> like nesting forms or skipping levels? I think it is OK to not require strict 
> adherence to A or AA documents, but the maximum AAA level documents should 
> have no undesirable conditions like this.
>
> Best regards.
>
> P.S.: I know that accessibility addresses many "grey areas", but the WG 
> should find a way to name desirable conditions even though they are not 
> required.
>
> Vicente Luque Centeno
> Dep. Ingeniería Telemática
> Universidad Carlos III de Madrid
> http://www.it.uc3m.es/vlc
>
> On Mon, 1 May 2006, Chris Ridpath wrote:
>
>>> I think that it is OK to skip headers for "A level"
>>> pages (or maybe also for "AA level"), but a
>>> "AAA level" page should avoid bad header hierarchy...
>>> 
>> 
>> The latest WCAG techniques document references the issue but does not have 
>> a technique or test for it.
>> 
>> So it appears that skipping levels is OK, even for level 3 compliance.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Chris
>