RE: Conforming alternative for mobile should not be Desktop



From: David MacDonald [mailto:david100@sympatico.ca]
Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2016 1:40 PM

It is an objectively degraded experience to use a view optimized for desktop on a mobile site (and yes these are the current industry terms for these views) , plus the time it takes to find the desktop site.

Unless I'm misunderstanding something, we have a basic philosophical disagreement. You feel that our users should be content finding a desktop link navigating to it and using it on a mobile phone.  I think the mobile menu, and widgets should work on a mobile device with the screen reader running.

If the site follows the new SCs, there is no requirement to get the mobile menu right, or any other part of the site specifically sent to the mobile view. Sure, the desktop conforms to WCAG, but it doesn't conform to common sense on a mobile device. Why should people with disabilities be forced in this back door when other users get the benefits of the mobile optimized site.
[Jason] It seems that what you are arguing for is a substantive requirement that content conforming to WCAG 2.1 must be usable across a range of devices (a concept that can be analyzed in terms of adaptation to different display sizes, types of input devices supported, and other characteristics). I don’t think playing with the “conforming alternate version” definition is the right way to sneak such a requirement into the specification. Instead, I think it belongs in success criteria, either at Level AA or Level AAA.


________________________________

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.

________________________________

Received on Wednesday, 29 June 2016 19:10:59 UTC