- From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
- Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 09:10:04 +0100
- To: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, "public-mobile-a11y-tf@w3.org" <public-mobile-a11y-tf@w3.org>
On 29/06/2016 01:14, David MacDonald wrote: > And she is forced to use a heavy link filled desktop view with > VoiceOver, turning on and off the rotor to chose different elements as > her swipe down action. If the site is so atrocious, it will also be atrocious to "desktop" users on a desktop/laptop. Bear in mind that the desktop version also needs to conform to WCAG, so things like 2.4.1 Bypass Blocks also apply. Additionally: even "desktop" sites often use things like dropdown menus etc for navigation, which - if the site passes WCAG 2.0, which it must to be counted as an "accessible alternate version" - will be coded correctly to expands/collapse, expose the correct role/state, and so on...so it's not necessarily always this dichotomy of "nice slick mobile version vs clunky and complex desktop version". In any case, it seems (?) that the addition of a note to the definiton of "accessible alternate version" will sufficiently reassure you that developers won't see the "link to desktop" as an exoneration in these cases? 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 Wednesday, 29 June 2016 08:10:29 UTC