Re: Transition Request for FPWD of Mobile Accessibility

> I've read top to bottom and agree with almost everything... there are a
> few important issues
> ​and a few nits
> .
>
> ​The important show stopper issues are:
>
> -ambiguity about the need for keyboard alternatives for gesture actions in
> section 3.3 and section 4.6
> -a creep on WCAG requirements for consistent navigation SC 3.2.3 in
> section 4.2 which could impact the meaning of 3.2.3 and 3.2.4 in WCAG
>
> There are a few other nits that are not show stoppers for me.
>
> A walk through with details below:​
>
> ======================
>  I think 3.3 needs a bullet with explicit mention that every touch gesture
> should have a keyboard equivalent, although there is a bullet in 3.4 about
> this it's not clear that this is necessary for 3.3 issues in the mobile doc.
>
> perhaps there is no mention of a keyboard equivelent requirement because
> of the exemption in 2.1.1
> "except where the underlying function requires input that depends on the
> path of the user's movement and not just the endpoints. (Level A)"
>
> This WCAG exemption was intended for drawing programs and when the user
> uses a mouse to draw something...I don't think the exemption should apply
> to gestures even though they depend on the "user's movement between
> endpoints".
>
> ==================================
> I think the mention of keyboard in 3.4 is a bit soft ... It says "should"
> rather than "must"
> "Therefore, even when device manipulation gestures are provided,
> developers **should** still provide touch and keyboard operable alternative
> control options.
>
>
> =====================
> Section 4.2
> "Components that are repeated across multiple pages should be presented in
> a consistent layout....Consistency between the different screen sizes and
> screen orientations is not a requirement under WCAG 2.0."
>
> This infers that consist component layout is required within screen sizes.
>
> I don't think this is quite what WCAG was getting at with SC's 3.2.3,
> 3.2.4.
> 3.2.3 was really just about left
> **
>
> navigation
> **
> menus, rather than components, and 3.2.4 was about labeling and
> identification rather than placement. I'm not saying that authors shouldn't
> place other things consistently
> , but I think this could lead to confusion about Consistency as it is
> required in WCAG
> , which it isn't  from my memory of those discussions and the current WCAG
> text.
>
>
> 3.2.3 Consistent Navigation: Navigational mechanisms that are repeated on
> multiple Web pages within a set of Web pages occur in the same relative
> order each time they are repeated, unless a change is initiated by the user.
>
> 3.2.4 Consistent Identification: Components that have the same
> functionality within a set of Web pages are identified consistently. (Level
> AA)
>
>
> I think section 4.2 of the mobile requires some rewriting
> to correct this confusion.
>
>
> ====================
>
>
> - the following sentence about orientation is confusing to me. I read it 4
> times and am still not sure what it means.
>
> "Therefore, mobile application developers should try to support both
> orientations. If it is not possible to support both orientations,
> developers should ensure that it is easy for all users to change the
> orientation to return to a point at which their device orientation is
> support"
>
> It's the part about "ensure that it is easy for all users to change the
> orientation to return to a point at which their device orientation is
> support"
>
> that confuses me...
>
>
>
> ========================
>
> 4.4
> This sentence confuses me
>
> "When multiple elements perform the same action or go to the same
> destination (e.g. link icon with link text), these should be contained
> within the same actionable element. "
>
> I guess it means, put the lined image and image text in the same anchor.
> But I had to read it 4 times.
>
> ================
>
> 4.5
> -Conventional style: Underlined text for <add>inline</add> links, color
> for link
>
> ======================
>
> 4.6
> "Therefore, instructions (e.g. overlays, tooltips, tutorials, etc.) should
> be provided to explain what gestures can be used to control a given
> interface and **whether** there are alternatives. "
>
> I think the word *whether* leaves it ambiguous whether there need to be
> keyboard alternatives. I think WCAG requires keyboard alternatives for all
> gestures.
>
> ================
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> David MacDonald
>
>
>
> CanAdapt Solutions Inc.
>
> Tel:  613.235.4902
>
> LinkedIn
>
> www.Can-Adapt.com
>
>
>
>   Adapting the web to all users
>
>             Including those with disabilities
>
> If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy
>
>
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 12:53 PM, Jeanne Spellman <jeanne@w3.org> wrote:
> >
> > Judy,
> >
> > The Mobile Accessibility Task Force of the Web Content Accessibility
> Guidelines Working Group (WCAG WG) and the User Agent Accessibility
> Guidelines Working Group (UAWG) requests approval to transition "Mobile
> Accessibility: How WCAG 2.0 and Other W3C/WAI Guidelines Apply to Mobile"
> to First Public Working Draft. This is planned as a W3C Note.
> >
> > Title:
> > Mobile Accessibility: How WCAG 2.0 and Other W3C/WAI Guidelines Apply to
> Mobile
> > Shortname:
> > mobile-accessibility-mapping
> > Version ready for publication as FPWD:
> >
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/mobile-a11y-tf/WD-mobile-accessibility-mapping-20150224/
> > Editor's Draft
> >
> > Estimated Publication Date:
> > Thursday 26 February 2015
> >
> >
> > == Abstract ==
> >
> >    This document, “Mobile Accessibility: How WCAG 2.0 and Other
> >    W3C/WAI Guidelines Apply to Mobile” describes how the Web
> >    Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 [WCAG20] and
> >    its principles, guidelines, and success criteria can be applied
> >    to mobile web content, mobile web apps, native apps, and hybrid
> >    apps using web components inside native apps. It provides
> >    informative guidance, but does not set requirements. It also
> >    highlights the relevance of the User Agent Accessibility
> >    Guidelines 2.0 [UAAG20] in the mobile context.
> >
> >    This document is intended to become a Working Group Note and is
> >    part of a series of technical and educational documents
> >    published by the [20]W3C Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI).
> >
> >      [20] http://www.w3.org/WAI/
> >
> >
> > == Status of This Document ==
> >
> >    This section describes the status of this document at the time
> >    of its publication. Other documents may supersede this
> >    document. A list of current W3C publications and the latest
> >    revision of this technical report can be found in the [21]W3C
> >    technical reports index at http://www.w3.org/TR/.
> >
> >      [21] http://www.w3.org/TR/
> >
> >    This document is a First Public Working Draft by the Mobile
> >    Accessibility Task Force (Mobile A11Y TF) operating under the
> >    terms of its [22]Work Statement under the joint coordination
> >    and review of the[23] Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
> >    Working Group (WCAG WG) and the [24]User Agent Accessibility
> >    Guidelines Working Group (UAWG), which is part of the [25]Web
> >    Accessibility Initiative (WAI) of the [26]World Wide Web
> >    Consortium (W3C). This document is intended to become a [27]W3C
> >    Note.
> >
> >      [22] http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/mobile-a11y-tf/work-statement
> >      [23] http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/
> >      [24] http://www.w3.org/WAI/UA/
> >      [25] http://www.w3.org/WAI/
> >      [26] http://www.w3.org/
> >      [27] http://www.w3.org/2004/02/Process-20040205/tr.html#WGNote
> >
> >    Feedback on this draft is essential to the success of this
> >    guidance. The Mobile Accessibility Task Force asks in
> >    particular:
> >     1. Is this document helpful in understanding the applicability
> >        of WCAG 2.0 and UAAG 2.0 to the mobile environment?
> >     2. Is the format of this information helpful for designers,
> >        developers and testers of content that can be viewed with
> >        mobile devices and in mobile apps? Is it useful for
> >        policymakers?
> >     3. In Appendix A, is listing relevant existing WCAG 2.0
> >        techniques helpful for mobile content and mobile app
> >        developers?
> >     4. Are there additional accessibility needs in the mobile
> >        environment related to the WCAG principles that we should
> >        address?
> >     5. Have we sufficiently explained why keyboard interface and
> >        modality independent controls are needed in the mobile
> >        environment?
> >
> >    To comment on this document, send email to
> >    [28]public-mobile-a11y-tf@w3.org ([29]subscribe, [30]archives)
> >    or [31]file an issue in Github. Comments are requested by 26
> >    March 2015. In-progress updates to the document may be viewed
> >    in the [32]publicly visible editors' draft.
> >
> >      [28] mailto:public-mobile-a11y-tf@w3.org
> >      [29] mailto:public-mobile-a11y-tf-request@w3.org?subject=subscribe
> >      [30] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-mobile-a11y-tf/
> >      [31] https://github.com/w3c/Mobile-A11y-TF-Note/issues
> >      [32] http://w3c.github.io/Mobile-A11y-TF-Note/
> >
> >    WCAG 2.0 is a stable web standard. Comments on this document
> >    will not affect WCAG 2.0 wording.
> >
> >    Publication as a First Public Working Draft does not imply
> >    endorsement by the W3C Membership. This is a draft document and
> >    may be updated, replaced or obsoleted by other documents at any
> >    time. It is inappropriate to cite this document as other than
> >    work in progress.
> >
> >    This document was produced by a group operating under the [33]5
> >    February 2004 W3C Patent Policy. The group does not expect this
> >    document to become a W3C Recommendation. W3C maintains a
> >    [34]public list of any patent disclosures made in connection
> >    with the deliverables of the Web Content Accessibility
> >    Guidelines Working Group and also maintains a [35]public list
> >    of any patent disclosures made in connection with the
> >    deliverables of the User Agent Accessibility Guidelines Working
> >    Group; those pages also include instructions for disclosing a
> >    patent. An individual who has actual knowledge of a patent
> >    which the individual believes contains [36]Essential Claim(s)
> >    must disclose the information in accordance with [37]section 6
> >    of the W3C Patent Policy.
> >
> >      [33] http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/
> >      [34] http://www.w3.org/2004/01/pp-impl/32212/status
> >      [35] http://www.w3.org/2004/01/pp-impl/36791/status
> >      [36]
> http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/#def-essential
> >      [37]
> http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy-20040205/#sec-Disclosure
> >
> >    This document is governed by the [38]1 August 2014 W3C Process
> >    Document.
> >
> >      [38] http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/
> >
> > == Delta specification ==
> >
> > This is not a delta specification.
> >
> >
> > == Decision to publish: ==
> > UAWG:
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-mobile-a11y-tf/2015Feb/0006.html
> > WCAG:
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-mobile-a11y-tf/2015Feb/0019.html
> > Mobile-A11y-TF:
> http://www.w3.org/2015/02/19-mobile-a11y-minutes.html#item03
> >
> > --
> > _______________________________
> > Jeanne Spellman
> > W3C Web Accessibility Initiative
> > jeanne@w3.org
> >
> >
>

Received on Wednesday, 25 February 2015 02:43:36 UTC