Re: regions of a page failure technique

How were these regions determined for wcag success before live regions? I
would like to hear some actual examples? Are we saying that skip links are
what gave P.D. (programmatic determination) to headers before html5/aria?

The point Wayne is making that regions necessarily must have P.D. should be
questioned. If there is no specific function for these regions which a user
needs to know about then it does not require P.D. Headers are headers for
style purposes primarily, not because of function. The functionality could
very well be anywhere on the page if not for styling considerations.
Location on the page is not equated to functionality.

On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 2:13 AM, White, Jason J <jjwhite@ets.org> wrote:

> +1 likewise.
>
>
>
> *From:* Wayne Dick [mailto:wayneedick@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 18, 2016 5:02 PM
> *To:* David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
> *Cc:* WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> *Subject:* Re: regions of a page failure technique
>
>
>
>
> +1
> Note a <div> with class = nav, heading or footer is a tip off in HTML 4.
> Use Case:
> There are pages that do have obvious heading, navigation and footer
> information (not all pages but many), the WAI page for example.  WCAG
> allows you to bypass these blocks with skip links, but usually skip links
> say go to main content. On the second or third visit to a page you may want
> to go to a specific navigation area, or to the footer for related links or
> the "contact us" link.  HTML 5 recognized the existence of these groupings
> and formalized it into elements, but the semantics were always there. We
> can certainly list these groupings in our techniques. Failure to enable
> screen readers users a way to get to these region
> fails to call out relationships that are expressed by presentation only.
>
>
>
> On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 5:54 AM, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
> wrote:
>
> I had an action item to update the proposal for a failure identified in
> issue 173
>
>
> "Failure of 1.3.1 due to regions of a page which are visually distinct,
>
> ​​
>
> ​and which ​
>
> contain distinct groups of content (headers, footers, navigation bars,
> main content, asides) not being programmatically determinable or identified
> by text.":
>
>
>
> I've added language to ensure these concerns that were raised are exempt.
>
>
>
> 1) Content that is not distinct visually is not a failure
>
> 2) Content that is not distinct  in substance is not a failure
>
> 3) Content that only has one or two items is not a failure because it is
> not a region (group of content)
>
>
>
> I support the technique because it is (1) a common failure of 1.3.1 (2) it
> is straight forward to fix (3) I would like to ensure we haven't frozen the
> ability to introduce common failures (4) it always was a failure, but
> currently it is easy to fix and we want to encourage a culture that allows
> blind people to easily find and identify regions
>
>
> 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>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or
> confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for whom
> it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this e-mail
> in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute, or
> take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and delete
> it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited.
>
> Thank you for your compliance.
> ------------------------------
>