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

Help me here, I don’t see how 3.2.2 can be nullified. It is clearly stated in my opinion. 

So if I select a radio button and new fields appear, the content as well as the context has changed and I should be informed it is going to do so or else it is a failure of 3.2.2.

3.2.2 On Input
Level A
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.
Regards,

Alan

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

From: David MacDonald
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2016 7:03 PM
To: Gregg Vanderheiden
Cc: Patrick H. Lauke; GLWAI Guidelines WG org; public-mobile-a11y-tf@w3.org
Subject: Re: New SC relating to notifications of content change (was Re: Some thinking around the orientation discussion)

Yes I tend to think that changes that happen downstream from the control that changes them could be exempt  if it's in the regular flow... such as a checkbox "do you have any kids" which adds fields for kids after the control if checked off...

so we might have to scope that use case out of the requirement... 

also for interactive things... 4.1.2 requires

"
​...​
states, properties, and values that can be set by the user can be programmatically set; and 
​***​
notification of changes to these items is available to user agents
​***​
, including assistive technologies."

So User interface components, such as expand collapse widgets, menus, etc... are covered in 4.1.2 and are not scoped in this SC...
​ regular aria-expanded etc... should do it...​

​Let's try to work off this draft, and make changes to that...​

https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/mobile-a11y-tf/wiki/Proposed_SC_on_information_added_or_removed_from_a_page#Proposed_3.4.1




Cheers,
David MacDonald
 
CanAdapt Solutions Inc.
Tel:  613.235.4902
LinkedIn 

twitter.com/davidmacd
GitHub
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 Wed, May 11, 2016 at 5:19 PM, Gregg Vanderheiden <gregg@raisingthefloor.org> wrote:
Hmmm

but as soon as they click the button and proceed down the page they will find them. 

Do we need to put the load on an author if a person does not navigate the page in a normal top down fashion ?  
Esp where it will annoy people who are navigating it down the page in the normal fashion  and keep getting alerts or have to read through all sorts of unnecessary text ?  (e.g.  Do you want to insurance (if you choose this there will be additional questions to answer just below)     Do you want GPS (if you click on this there will be additional questions to answer below)    Do you want  

Whatever method you use to alert them - will have to be repeated for any particular items on the page that expand.  And this will be very annoying I would think — especially to screen reader users.. 

No?  

gregg 

On May 11, 2016, at 4:08 PM, Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk> wrote:

On 11/05/2016 22:00, Gregg Vanderheiden wrote:

Correct

The question is — if these are BELOW the radio button in question — is
there any accessibility problem at all.  ??

There can be a problem if the user has already navigated past those radio buttons (perhaps to get an overview/feel for the form...or maybe they already went past that particular set of buttons previously and have now backtracked in the form), and now the form has mutated from what they previously encountered.

P
-- 
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