Re: (WCAG 2.1) Do we want to replace ​"programmatically determined link context" in 2.4.4 with "Accessible Name"?

I started a WIKI to capture possible amendments that reflect the emerging
consensus here which I believe is:

1) to add the concept of Accessible Name
2) NOT change the requirements of the SC

The proposal is to not change the requirements of 2.4.4, but rather to
shift focus away from enclosing sentence and paragraph for link context,
and towards new better ways of establishing programatic context.
https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Modify_2.4.4_to_include_Accessible_Name_for_link_destination

Cheers,
David MacDonald



*Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*
Tel:  613.235.4902

LinkedIn
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>

twitter.com/davidmacd

GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald>

www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/>



*  Adapting the web to all users*
*            Including those with disabilities*

If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy
<http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html>

On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 7:27 AM, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
wrote:

> How about this for WCAG2.1
>
> 2.4.4 Link Purpose (In Context): The purpose of each link can be
> determined from the link text alone or from the link text together with its
> programmatically determined link context, or from its Accessible Name
> except where the purpose of the link would be ambiguous to users in
> general. (Level A)
>
> Cheers,
> David MacDonald
>
>
>
> *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*
> Tel:  613.235.4902
>
> LinkedIn
> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>
>
> twitter.com/davidmacd
>
> GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald>
>
> www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/>
>
>
>
> *  Adapting the web to all users*
> *            Including those with disabilities*
>
> If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy
> <http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html>
>
> On Wed, Jul 20, 2016 at 6:33 AM, Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
> wrote:
>
>> David wrote:
>>
>> > My proposal is that the user will know where the link goes from the
>> Accessible Name nothing more. We could provide guidance on a good length.
>>
>>
>>
>> I have to agree with John’s:
>>
>> > whatever we write up must be achievable in such a way as to not be
>> dependent on a specific pattern or software.
>>
>>
>>
>> The concept of “programmatically determined” is necessarily wider than
>> “Accessible name”. The examples of links in the context of a structure
>> (under headings, under table headings) is still important.
>>
>>
>>
>> I’d be happy supplementing the current docs with description of
>> accessible name and examples of its use, but I don’t think it can replace
>> it.
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>>
>>
>> -Alastair
>>
>
>