- From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
- Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 20:06:43 +0100
- To: "w3c-wai-gl@w3.org" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
On 15/07/2016 19:18, Sailesh Panchang wrote: > I like: "4.1.3 Non-interference of AT: Content does not interfere with > default functionality of platform level assistive technology" > But what I would like that S508 type of requirement to cover are > situations where techniques are misapplied or incorrectly / > incompletely applied especially when another technique has been > implemented that meets an SC. As a result of haphazard implementation > of another technique that breaks accessibility experience for the user > and leads to confusion. > > Consider just one example: > Page has an h1 for main content just after start of div with role=main. > Yet there is a skip to content link that has its target set elsewhere > on the page. > So while h-tag or landmark is used for bypassing blocks (2.4.1) and > exposing page structure (1.3.1), the skip to content link (not relied > upon) only results in confusing users. But that (even in the 508 sense, I'd say) is not a case of "disrupt or disable"...more of a "the author messed up" to be noted under 2.4.1, no? 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 Friday, 15 July 2016 19:07:06 UTC