RE: New SC relating to notifications of content change (was Re: Some thinking around the orientation discussion)

I have found countless retail sites with filters on the left and content that automatically changes based on what the user selects in checkboxes or radio buttons. A direct violation of 3.2.2.

Regards,

Alan

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

From: Katie Haritos-Shea GMAIL
Sent: Friday, May 6, 2016 12:46 PM
To: 'Patrick H. Lauke'; public-mobile-a11y-tf@w3.org; 'GLWAI Guidelines WG org'
Cc: 'lisa.seeman'; ryladog@gmail.com
Subject: RE: New SC relating to notifications of content change (was Re: Some thinking around the orientation discussion)

I think this relates to both these SC as well...........

3.2.1 On Focus: When any component receives focus, it does not initiate a change of context. (Level A)

3.2.2 On Input: Changing the setting of any user interface component does not automatically cause a change of context unless the user has been advised of the behavior before using the component. (Level A)

​​​​​



* katie *
 
Katie Haritos-Shea 
Principal ICT Accessibility Architect (WCAG/Section 508/ADA/AODA)
 
Cell: 703-371-5545 | ryladog@gmail.com | Oakton, VA | LinkedIn Profile | Office: 703-371-5545


-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick H. Lauke [mailto:redux@splintered.co.uk] 
Sent: Friday, May 6, 2016 11:20 AM
To: public-mobile-a11y-tf@w3.org; GLWAI Guidelines WG org <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Cc: lisa.seeman <lisa.seeman@zoho.com>
Subject: Re: New SC relating to notifications of content change (was Re: Some thinking around the orientation discussion)

On 06/05/2016 15:56, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:
>
> I think this is essential - but I think it is already covered.

Where? Under which SC would this fall? To clarify, this is not (I think)
4.1.2 as that SC relates to updating/notifying user of change to interactive elements/controls (so that if their status changes, or their actual function/label, that this is done in a way that then conveys the change programmatically to users), not about changes in the overall document/structure/content elsewhere on the page.

> If not - then it would need to be clarified in connection with 
> conformance rather than as another SC.
> If this isn’t obvious/clear already (and evidently it isnt) then  I 
> THINK it could be clarified in Understanding WCAG 2.0 — and be done 
> immediately with the next publication of that document.
>
>   I and Loretta and David and others can confirm that it was the 
> intent and understanding of the group that if it changed - it should 
> remain accessible.
>
>
> does this help?
>
>
>
> /gregg/

--
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