Re: 2.4.3, 1.3.2

Sailesh,
If one would expect to fill out the form one person at a time, would the
default table layout (not taking into consideration focus order) not violate
1.3.2? After all, the programmatically determined reading order would read
the cells of the table row by row, not person by person. If so, then this is
not a sufficient technique.
We must then conclude that there is no violation of 1.3.2, and the author's
tabindexing is only a preference, in which a case this technique is totally
irrelevant.
Either way, there is a problem.

On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 6:07 AM, Loretta Guarino Reid <
lorettaguarino@google.com> wrote:

>
>
> On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 8:03 PM, Sailesh Panchang <spanchang02@yahoo.com>wrote:
>
>> Loretta,
>> In principle, if you content:
>> >But the use of H4 is not required for SC 2.4.3...
>> Then why is it listed as a sufficient technique?
>>
>
> Because it is sufficient. You may use it, but you may use some other
> sufficient technique.
>
>
>> Adam,
>> Well in that example of groom and bride, without tabindex, one may content
>> that reading order is meaningful. But if one navigates across fields
>> row-wise, it does affect meaning or operation. As I said in my last email,
>> the intent is not to compare first names but actually enter data into a
>> form. I imagine most would want to be done with data for one person then
>>  input data for the next. While filling out paper forms too,I'd complete the
>> form for person#1 and then person#2 and not fill out first name for person#1
>> then jump to form for the other chap and fill out his first name. That is
>> not logical. On a Web page the fields may be placed next to each other
>> visually but they are meant to be navigated "logically" for person#1 and
>> then #2. It is not the author's choice or reading  order... the author is
>> constrained by layout / design and must use tabindex (h4) to ensure
>> navigation does not affect operation.
>> Sailesh
>>
>>
>>
>