- From: Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com>
- Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 16:54:47 +0000
- To: "w3c-wai-gl@w3.org" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
> Note: While checking for non-unique ids, validators consider id values of elements that are hidden and not rendered on the page. I think this is also a broader question -- if there is a failure for content that is hidden and never shown in any responsive mode such as a input without accessible name used as a honey pot with display:none -- is that really a failure of any of the criteria? Jonathan Jonathan Avila Chief Accessibility Officer SSB BART Group jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com 703.637.8957 (Office) Visit us online: Website | Twitter | Facebook | Linkedin | Blog Check out our Digital Accessibility Webinars! -----Original Message----- From: Sailesh Panchang [mailto:sailesh.panchang@deque.com] Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2016 12:37 PM To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org Cc: David MacDonald; Steve Faulkner; Katie Haritos-Shea GMAIL Subject: Re: Question: testing for non-unique id values SC 4.1.1 Proposed clarification for H93 and F77: <start note> Note: While checking for non-unique ids, validators consider id values of elements that are hidden and not rendered on the page. However, For the purpose of this SC (or from an accessibility standpoint), hidden elements using non-unique id values are problematic only if these elements are referenced by a WAI-ARIA attribute like aria-describedby, aria-labelledby etc. </end note> F77 begins with, "failure condition where duplicate ID errors are known to cause problems for assistive technologies ...": Is this not capturing the SC's intent with respect to ids? G134 too acknowledges , "Validation will usually eliminate ambiguities (and more) because an essential step in validation is to check for proper use of that technology's markup (in a markup language) or code (in other technologies)". Thanks, Sailesh Panchang
Received on Thursday, 29 September 2016 16:55:19 UTC