Re: Principle 4 - Robust (was Re: Help needed with numbering success criteria for WCAG 2.1)

>>>An alternative would be to move the proposed guideline 3.4 under
"Principle 1: Perceivable - Information and user interface components must
be presentable to users in ways they can perceive.", and more explicitly
under "Guideline 1.3 Adaptable: Create content that can be presented in
different ways (for example simpler layout) without losing information or
structure." - however, I feel this would cover only the
visual/presentational aspect, rather than also any functional concerns
(that content should also "work" in different orientations)...or perhaps
I'm overthinking this part?

You can never overthink an SC :-)   ... They need to be kicked and prodded
from every direction during development. I felt during the creation of WCAG
2 that Principle 4 was an area that was more difficult to develop, and
didn't get as much attention as the other SCs. I think there is room to
expand and fill it out in WCAG  2.1 if there is good reason to do so.

I'm guessing that by "functional concerns" you mean that the content will
still work in any orientation. I think you want to ensure in layman's terms
"All content is in the horizontal aspect ratio of the viewport
(Perceivable) and *works* in any orientation (Robust)".

WCAG Conformance Criteria 4 requires:

*4. Only Accessibility-Supported Ways of Using Technologies:* See Understanding
accessibility support
<http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/conformance.html#uc-accessibility-support-head>
.

But that is about assistive technologies and special assisitive features in
browser.


Perhaps we can tweak that definition to ensure that a user who has a fixed
orientation is an accessibility requirement for that user, and therefore
falls under the Conformance Criteria 4 "special accessibility features in
mainstream user agents". Then we won't have to worry about splitting it
up... It can go in Perceivable, and the functional aspects are covered in
the overarching Conformance criterion 4.









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 Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 3:59 AM, Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
wrote:

> On 27/06/2016 01:57, David MacDonald wrote:
>
>> Hi Patrick
>>
>> My thinking is that this fits well under perceivable. I'm hoping that we
>> will expand Perceivable to
>> Guideline 1.5 include dynamic and updating content. It might go well in
>> there.
>>
>> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/mobile-a11y-tf/wiki/Proposed_SC_on_information_added_or_removed_from_a_page
>>
>
> Note that this is NOT about dynamic changes/updates. It's not about how a
> site/app reacts when orientation/viewport is changed, but rather that it
> actually works in those orientations/changes (e.g. if a tablet is fixed to
> landscape orientation and the user accesses a site, NOT about the user
> accessing the site in portrait and then turning the device into landscape).
> So no, that's a separate issue from the one I'm talking about.
>
>
> 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
>
>
>