Re: Conforming alternative for mobile should not be Desktop

I think we can do whatever we need to do to ensure the web is accessible.
We have a mandate in the charter to ensure mobile is accessible. That's why
we are all donating months of our lives to the Mobile Task Force.

 If there is a huge hole in WCAG 2.1 that says, "Hey we have a bunch of new
SCs to meet for mobile, but you don't need to do any of this because the
conforming alternative clause allows you to rely on the large screen view"
then what is the point?

We certainly can, and should plug this hole if we think it's important.

If you are thinking of a more global statement about conforming
alternatives then feel free to suggest one. My  suggestion is simply to add
a line to the understanding doc on conforming alternative that says
something like "...same functionality includes functions optimized for
screen size. Therefore functions optimized for large screen cannot be used
as a conforming alternative for functions optimized for small screen"

I know it's not perfect but its a start and we can fix the wording to
accomplish our goal the not forcing blind people to go home and use their
desktops because the mobile view doesn't work.

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 Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 8:45 AM, Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
wrote:

> I (cautiously) agree with the sentiment expressed here (and the fact that
> you used "large screen" vs "small screen" wording). However, it could be
> argued that as long there's a link or similar mechanism to go from the
> (inaccessible) mobile view to the (accessible) desktop view - which IS
> required as per point 4 of the definition - then it's fine in the same way
> that having two alternatives purely on desktop is fine? Considering that
> the "desktop" view will be accessible on the phone/tablet (but will likely
> be less *usable* due to the for the user to zoom/scroll horizontally/etc)?
>
> i.e. I don't see how a special case can be made to plug the gap only in
> the specific mobile/desktop situation.
>
> P
>
>
> On 28/06/2016 13:29, David MacDonald wrote:
>
>> We currently have a bit of a hole in WCAG 2 that I think we should plug
>> in 2.1.
>>
>> If a web page has a conforming alternative, then it doesn't need to
>> conform itself. However, in the world of responsible design, it means if
>> the desktop version conforms, the mobile version does not need to. I
>> think we should plug this in WCAG 2.1.
>>
>> It might be as  simple as adding a sentence to the definition of
>> conforming alternative that large screen views of web pages do not
>> qualify as a conforming alternative to small screen views. It will take
>> some thought as to the exact wording and approach but it needs to be
>> addressed I woulds say, otherwise organizations may just say they don't
>> meed to make the mobile view accessible.
>>
>> https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#conforming-alternate-versiondef
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> David MacDonald
>>
>>
>>
>> *Can**Adapt**Solutions Inc.*
>>
>> Tel:  613.235.4902
>>
>> LinkedIn
>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>
>>
>> twitter.com/davidmacd <http://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>
>>
>
>
> --
> 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
>
>
>