RE: Errata on WCAG 2.0 1.3.3 and 1.4.1

+1

Kathy
CEO & Founder
Interactive Accessibility

T (978) 443-0798  F (978) 560-1251  C (978) 760-0682
E kathyw@ia11y.com<mailto:kathyw@ia11y.com>
www.InteractiveAccessibility.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.interactiveaccessibility.com_&d=CwMGaQ&c=jxhwBfk-KSV6FFIot0PGng&r=UK__SX18Mp9Fb6tIJfzgjkhM1qTux9WksegD3zR-Bss&m=Kyx2xjSikKdohzK4YYjpf6lkpNeSYzbcW2-3BWkmRfM&s=QvEa6SOOfiPYi3edgtQBne9UjZFUHulJz3xqkGwAu7o&e=>

NOTICE: This communication may contain privileged or other confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, please reply to the sender indicating that fact and delete the copy you received. Any disclosure, copying, distribution or action taken or omitted to be taken by an unintended recipient in reliance on this message is prohibited and may be unlawful.

From: Andrew Kirkpatrick [mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2017 10:21 PM
To: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: Errata on WCAG 2.0 1.3.3 and 1.4.1

Gregg suggested (correctly, I believe) that the original intent of 1.3.3 and 1.4.1 is being misunderstood due to the language of the notes.

The suggestion is to remove the notes for both SC and the explicitly add “color” to the list of sensory characteristics in 1.3.3:

1.3.3 Sensory Characteristics: Instructions provided for understanding and operating content do not rely solely on sensory characteristics of components such as shape, size, @@color,@@ visual location, orientation, or sound.

Color is clearly a sensory characteristic, so we could also just handle the addition of “color” in the understanding document but I think that given that color is explicitly discussed in 1.4.1 it may decrease possible misunderstandings.

Step one is to add this to the errata document. Step two would be to implement the change in the WCAG 2.1 release.

What do people think?

Thanks,
AWK

Andrew Kirkpatrick
Group Product Manager, Accessibility
Adobe

akirkpat@adobe.com<mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com>
http://twitter.com/awkawk