RE: Question: testing for non-unique id values SC 4.1.1

Or just make it part of 2.1, and improve the language to clearly cover other web technologies beyond HTML. I know of organizations that do not recognize ARIA as being an applicable technology under 4.1.1

 

​​​​​

 

 

 

* katie *

 

Katie Haritos-Shea 
Principal ICT Accessibility Architect (WCAG/Section 508/ADA/AODA)

 

Cell: 703-371-5545 |  <mailto:ryladog@gmail.com> ryladog@gmail.com | Oakton, VA |  <http://www.linkedin.com/in/katieharitosshea/> LinkedIn Profile | Office: 703-371-5545 |  <https://twitter.com/Ryladog> @ryladog

 

From: David MacDonald [mailto:david100@sympatico.ca] 
Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 10:49 AM
To: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Cc: Sailesh Panchang <spanchang02@yahoo.com>; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: Re: Question: testing for non-unique id values SC 4.1.1

 

I also agree that this is what 4.1.1 SHOULD require. 

 

But I think the language of the SC currently requires all id's in the DOM to be unique. I think we could justify a clarification (change) in the Understanding given that all the rational provided is about accessibility of components.

 

Perhaps add the sentence. What should the clarifying language be?




Cheers,
David MacDonald

 

CanAdapt Solutions Inc.

Tel:  613.235.4902

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


twitter.com/davidmacd <http://twitter.com/davidmacd> 

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

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 Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com <mailto:faulkner.steve@gmail.com> > wrote:

 

On 29 September 2016 at 15:01, Sailesh Panchang <spanchang02@yahoo.com <mailto:spanchang02@yahoo.com> > wrote:

So id values repeated in hidden content that are not referenced by any ARIA attribute do not need to be fixed strictly from an accessibility standpoint. Is this view accurate?

 

I agree with this.




--

Regards

SteveF

Current Standards Work @W3C <http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/2015/03/current-standards-work-at-w3c/>