- From: David MacDonald <befree@magma.ca>
- Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 13:05:06 -0400
- To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <34225.1276794306@magma.ca>
Hi All As we prepare for a refresh on the Techniques document, members of the Canadian Government access working group have brought to our attention the example in H42 (code below), which is about using headings to mark up structure. In WCAG 2.0 we do not require the nesting of headings, but they feel we should at least provide examples which encourage the structure laid out in the HTML spec. The current example uses an H2 to mark up a Nav bar in a 3 column layout and an H1 to Mark up the main content. They feel it leads to confusion for policy makers and template makers for several reasons: 1) The first heading in the code is an H2, (it's there because of the CSS layout but it is still confusing to some) 2) The H2 is not a Sub Heading of the only other H1 in code. 3) The H2 is used to mark up the Navigation Menu and they feel this is driving a stake into the ground about the way WCAG 2 is recommending web designers build Nav bars, and the way policy makers require Navigation menus to be build. My feeling is that given that ARIA and HTML 5 are going to have much better ways of marking up NAV bars and three column layouts, we should discard the example that tries to use Headings for the purpose of identifying and dictating the importance of the NAV bar (and also the Right hand menu) in relation to the main content. I'm recommending instead a simple hierarchical example. And add some text to the description of the technique to make it clear that although hierarchical headings are preferred when appropriate, they are not required under the guidelines. Current example... Example 1 SITE NAVIGATION STOCK MARKET UP TODAY RELATED LINKS
Received on Thursday, 17 June 2010 17:05:38 UTC