Re: Automated A11y non-issues and SC Parsing 4.1.1

+1 to false positive.

Usually you would get non-accessibility effects to duplicate IDs (e.g. messing up the visual appearance, or JavaScript errors) unless you’re quite careful. The only accessibility oriented effect I can think of is where within-page targets are used.

In terms of a 2.1 change to 4.1.1 Parsing: perhaps a note to the effect that it should be tested with the ‘rendered object model when source code is dynamically modified by scripts’ or something?

-Alastair


From: Joshue O Connor <josh@interaccess.ie>
Date: Monday, 18 July 2016 at 13:24
To: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: Automated A11y non-issues and SC Parsing 4.1.1
Resent-From: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Resent-Date: Monday, 18 July 2016 at 13:25

Hi all,

I have a client which uses multiple IDs in their UI widgets - these IDs are 'active' at different times for different reasons depending where the user is within a 'flow'. It hasn't demonstrated any a11y problems, but is technically a fail of SC 4.1.1.

My client is doing really good work in terms of their a11y approach, and I really don't want to fail them on this. But these 'errors' are called out by automated tools, and will be visible to anyone else testing the site. I just can't say they have resulted in a problem at all.

What would you guys/gals do? Do this also represent a 'false negative' that we should address in 2.1 or Silver?

Thoughts?

Josh