Re: Conforming alternative for mobile should not be Desktop

On 30/06/2016 19:07, David MacDonald wrote:

> ====I wrote to Loretta, who was an editor on WCAG 2 who's opinion I
> greatly value with the following scenario====
>
> Company X has a responsive web site. It has 2 break points based on
> viewport size. A user on a mobile device gets the same site as as the
> desktop, except it has a Hamburger menu icon instead of the mega menu.
>
> The mega menu conforms to WCAG, the Hamburger menu does not. There is no
> link to the desktop version. Does this page conform to WCAG?
>
> Some feel that it currently passes because there is one accessibility
> supported solution. Others think that it does not pass because the user
> on the mobile device doesn't have a choice about which view they get,
> (unless there is an accessible link to the desktop -alternative
> conforming- version.)

And to be clear, I (and I think most others that have dipped into this 
mega-discussion) fall in the latter camp which for this very specific 
scenario (responsive site, no desktop version link) think it does NOT 
pass. Not quite sure who thinks that it does...

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 Thursday, 30 June 2016 18:31:58 UTC