Re: regions of a page failure technique

Hi David,
The word live was simply a mistake on my part. I meant to reference html5
elements/aria landmarks

What do you mean by substantive? I question whether different regions of a
page are required by wcag to be marked up as such. Consider a page which
has multiple content regions. One of the regions of the page has
descriptive text of a certain topic. Another has a gallery of pictures.
Substantially different to be sure, yet if there are no visual headers I
have always understood that wcag does not mandate special markup except at
level AAA with headers.

Regarding the mission, I agree wholeheartedly, but I could never agree to
stretch the definition of wcag2 because of the mission. I do believe this
should be included in the extensions, and in fact in Israel we have
mandated region markup because of the importance of it.



On Thu, May 19, 2016 at 3:08 PM, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
wrote:

> Hi Adam
>
> >How were these regions determined for wcag success before live regions?
>
> I'm not sure what is meant by "live regions". That is an ARIA attribute
> for changing content. If it means static regions, then I would say there
> was always a positive obligation to identify them, but not a great way to
> do so. For instance, many of us were recommending a heading above a
> navigation region to identify it, and of course a heading above the main
> content. We tried to manage that with the best practice of "one h1 on a
> page", but that was not ideal in all circumstances. With all the other
> headings in the content it was not an elegant solution to use headings to
> identify all regions with headings. There was always the ability to
> identify these regions, but it was not particularly attractive as a
> solution except for navigation sections, and for the main content.
>
> So the failure was always there but not well enforced for good reason. Now
> there is no good reason not to document the positive requirement to make
> information and relationships in this regard programmatically determinable
> (or available in text.)
>
> > If there is no specific function for these regions which a user needs
> to know about then it does not require P.D.
>
> If there is no distinction between the content and it's surrounding
> content there will be no failure. The failure only applies to content that
> visual AND substantively different, and not just one or 2 items.
>
> I'm reminded of why the working group exists. To make the web more
> accessible for people with disabilities. Let us not loose site of our
> mission. I think region identification and navigation is a huge win for
> blind people and a small cost for businesses given the exceptions provided
> in the failure.
>
> 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 19, 2016 at 2:49 AM, Adam Solomon <adam.solomon2@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> 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.
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>
>>
>