- From: Sailesh Panchang <sailesh.panchang@deque.com>
- Date: Thu, 12 May 2016 13:33:49 -0400
- To: David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
- Cc: Gregg Vanderheiden <gregg@raisingthefloor.org>, "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>, GLWAI Guidelines WG org <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
David, Programmatic notification: Not needed IMO. Error messages too are notifications and a change in content. SC 3.3.1 only requires they are described and are in text. Then, if the messages indicate relationship via presentation, SC 1.3.1 kicks in. This will apply to all similar changes in content. BTW, consider a carousel: are we limited by the current set of SCs while evaluating accessibility? Thanks, Sailesh On 5/12/16, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca> wrote: > oops "already covered in 4.1.1 " I meant 4.1.2 > > Cheers, > David MacDonald > > > > *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.* > Tel: 613.235.4902 > > LinkedIn > <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100> > > twitter.com/davidmacd > > GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald> > > www.Can-Adapt.com <http://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 > <http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html> > > On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 9:42 AM, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca> > wrote: > >> >> >> >Every time you click a link you change content >> I'm not sure what this refers to... if it means the changed state from >> unvisited to visited then that's already covered in 4.1.1 and is >> accessibility supported, screen readers announce that state. If it refers >> to taking the user somewhere, then that is a change of *location* not a >> change of content. >> >> >Every time you click on a pull down menu >> Again this is a change of state, from expanded=false to true, and that is >> announced to the user if it is coded properly, and 4.1.2 requires it be >> coded properly to announce that state, and this is sufficient >> notification >> "navigation region expanded" >> >> >When you push down a button and it changes color before you lift it up >> the mouse? >> Again this is a change of state, and it already is required in 4.1.2 >> >> There are questions to resolve with this SC but I *don't* think *these* >> are of concern. >> >> Updating content is a significant problem on the modern web. One issue >> to >> solve is to decide on the requirements for changes that happen downstream >> from the control that changes them. We may want to scope out changes to >> "flow content" when follows the button. >> >> Cheers, >> David MacDonald >> >> >> >> *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.* >> Tel: 613.235.4902 >> >> LinkedIn >> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100> >> >> twitter.com/davidmacd >> >> GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald> >> >> www.Can-Adapt.com <http://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 >> <http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html> >> >> On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 7:24 PM, Gregg Vanderheiden < >> gregg@raisingthefloor.org> wrote: >> >>> There are a million things that change content. >>> >>> Little bitty changes. >>> Every time you click a link you change content >>> Every time you click on a pull down menu >>> When you push down a button and it changes color before you lift it up >>> the mouse? >>> >>> I think there may be a world of unintended consequence to introducing >>> something that requires warning with every change of content. >>> >>> Two questions. >>> >>> 1. what are the problems that real people are experiencing with real >>> content that blocks them from using it >>> 2. have you thoroughly catalogued all the places where content >>> changes for any reason - any amount >>> >>> >>> I think you will need to research and thoroughly document both before >>> you >>> can >>> a) determine if the benefit outweighs the problems. >>> b) figure out if and how to word an SC that avoids the problems and is >>> still testable (e.g. you can’t say “significant change in content” — >>> since an author would never know what an evaluator would consider >>> significant. >>> >>> >>> *gregg* >>> >>> On May 11, 2016, at 5:39 PM, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca> >>> wrote: >>> >>> I've taken stab at tweaking the SC proposal to address Gregg's concern >>> about "User awareness". I borrowed the language from Programatically >>> Determined, and created a new glossary item called "Programmatic >>> notification". >>> >>> SC x.x.x Change of content: Programmatic notification is provided for >>> changes in content that either conveys information or indicates an >>> action >>> was taken, whether these changes are made by auto updates or as a result >>> of >>> user action. (Level AA) >>> >>> Definition of "Programmatic notification": Notification by software from >>> data provided in a user-agent-supported manner such that the user agents >>> can extract and present this notification to users in different >>> modalities, >>> without futher action by the user, beyond activating the control which >>> caused the change. >>> >>> I've updated the Understanding to add Sailesh's examples when this >>> applies and his distinction between notification of content... and >>> changes >>> that can be conveyed by notification of change of states, properties and >>> values required in 4.1.2. >>> The proposal is here: >>> >>> 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 >>> >>> >>> *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.* >>> Tel: 613.235.4902 >>> LinkedIn >>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100> >>> twitter.com/davidmacd >>> GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald> >>> www.Can-Adapt.com <http://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 >>> <http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html> >>> >>> On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Patrick H. Lauke >>> <redux@splintered.co.uk >>> > wrote: >>> >>>> On 11/05/2016 21:33, Sailesh Panchang wrote: >>>> >>>>> "User awareness" is used in the same manner as is used in the >>>>> glossary explaining "change of context". Any other alternative >>>>> wording? >>>>> The SC will need a note to clarify that this does not apply to links >>>>> and such listed in the exclusions listed in that email. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Ditto for "regular" forms, whose submit action would reload the current >>>> page / load another page. >>>> >>>> Would the exclusion be, in very broad strokes, along the lines of >>>> "unless the change in content as a result of user action is expected >>>> and >>>> follows standard behavior (e.g. activation of a link resulting in a new >>>> webpage being loaded)" or similar? >>>> >>>> >>>> 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 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >
Received on Thursday, 12 May 2016 17:34:18 UTC