- From: John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com>
- Date: Tue, 8 Dec 2015 10:28:00 -0600
- To: "'Jonathan Avila'" <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com>, "'Sailesh Panchang'" <sailesh.panchang@deque.com>, "'Andrew Kirkpatrick'" <akirkpat@adobe.com>
- Cc: "'Steve Faulkner'" <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, "'Paul Adam'" <paul.adam@deque.com>, <josh@interaccess.ie>, "'Detlev Fischer'" <detlev.fischer@testkreis.de>, "'David MacDonald'" <david100@sympatico.ca>, "'Makoto UEKI'" <ueki@infoaxia.com>, "'WCAG'" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Jonathan Avila [mailto:jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com] wrote: > > But this whole discussion > raises questions about grouping mechanisms and accessibility support. > <snip> > > We need some sort of decision tree like the name > calculation to help people figure this out. > +1 to both of these comments. It also (for me) raises a question: If the *code* meets the technical requirements, but is not "accessibility supported" by AT today, is it a failure of the content and content author, or a failure of the software tools? I believe this is important when it comes to conformance claims. I like the idea of a decision tree, as it may also be useful in answering my question - or at least in allowing content creators to make informed decisions. JF
Received on Tuesday, 8 December 2015 16:28:32 UTC