Re: Issue 171

Perhaps getting approval takes a long time in a bureaucratic organization
... but I'm trying to think of a situation where this would be complex, and
I can't.... I've worked with some of the largest sites out there, and it's
been one of the easiest accessibility wins.

Perhaps you can think of an outlier that I don't know of, but I think the
overarching issue is that this information should be available to blind
people, its a common error and it's easy to fix.

Let's see if we can tip the scales and raise the number of failure
techniques from 3 to 4 . Then it will be new 120 techniques to 4 failures
since the release of WCAG 2 8 years ago

On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 12:39 PM, James Nurthen <james.nurthen@oracle.com>
wrote:

> David,
> For some websites this may be 5 minutes but for many more complex
> applications it is much much more. I don't think you should underestimate
> how long even a seemingly minor change can make in a complex web
> application.
>
> Regards,
> James
>
> On 4/7/2016 9:19 AM, David MacDonald wrote:
>
> Hi Adam
>
> I've tried to address the language and changed in the proposal to ensure
> there is different content in the separate region which is distinct from
> the other content. In other words, if there is distinct content in a footer
> and its visually indicated as distinct, the failure would apply. We are
> really trying to get websites to take the 5 minutes necessary to fix this
> and make the site much more navigable, and understandable.
>
> "This failure addresses the problem that occurs when regions of a page
> are visually distinct from other parts of the page, and contain different
> content (such as groups of links, advertisements, etc.) that are distinct
> from the main content of the page, but are not easy to identify for those
> who cannot see those visual distinctions."
>
> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 12:06 AM, Adam Solomon <adam.solomon2@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> To extend this thinking, consider a header which has a logo at the top of
>> the page and is distinguished by its unique background color relative to
>> the rest of the page. This visual cue of background color is really only a
>> style consideration. What relationship of structure is being conveyed here?
>> The fact that the header happens to be at the top of the page seems
>> irrelevant to structure.
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 3:02 AM, Patrick H. Lauke <
>> <redux@splintered.co.uk>redux@splintered.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On 06/04/2016 23:15, David MacDonald wrote:
>>>
>>>> If there is a visual indication of a Header, Footer, Navigation, etc...
>>>> then knowledge of these sections should be available to people who are
>>>> blind.
>>>> This is why we have 1.3.1.
>>>>
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> Here is Gregg's comment about failures:
>>>> =====
>>>> actually, you can document a failure if there is a fail — at any point
>>>> in time.   A fail is like a technique.
>>>>
>>>> Failures  (full name is    common failure  )  is
>>>>
>>>>   * something that ALWAYS fails the SC as written
>>>>   * is common - and therefore worth documenting.
>>>>
>>>> failures never modify WCAG - they just document what is a failure
>>>>   (ALWAYS a failure on all content)
>>>>
>>>
>>> And this is where I see a danger of making very broad statements about
>>> "visual indication" without actually considering the content and context.
>>> Conversely, if the basis of determining the failure is the "visual
>>> indication", what happens if the exact same markup that would fail under
>>> this new failure was simply styled NOT to have a distinct visual
>>> indication? Would that then be a pass?
>>>
>>> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/173#issuecomment-206625763
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Patrick H. Lauke
>>>
>>> www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
>>> http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com
>>> twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
>>>
>>>
>>
>
> --
> Regards, James
>
> [image: Oracle] <http://www.oracle.com>
> James Nurthen | Principal Engineer, Accessibility
> Phone: +1 650 506 6781 <+1%20650%20506%206781> | Mobile: +1 415 987 1918
> <+1%20415%20987%201918> | Video: james.nurthen@oracle.com
> Oracle Corporate Architecture
> 500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood Cty, CA 94065
> [image: Green Oracle] <http://www.oracle.com/commitment> Oracle is
> committed to developing practices and products that help protect the
> environment
>