- From: Sailesh Panchang <sailesh.panchang@deque.com>
- Date: Tue, 30 May 2017 16:51:24 -0400
- To: Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>
- Cc: Gregg C Vanderheiden <greggvan@umd.edu>, "w3c-waI-gl@w3. org" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
I have some strong concerns here and feel introducing this SC might make one wonder how come WCAG 2.0 has left this out. The situations described in the intent[1] existed even when WCAG 2.0 was first written up. In Web 1.0 world, one would perhaps have used JS alerts or such to notify users • "Your form was successfully submitted." • "There are 5 results for your search" • "There are 3 errors on this form" and so on With JS alerts being out of style and AJAX etc. being available now, these messages are displayed in a manner that they are visually distinct: as if it is an alert or tooltip, or updated status etc. What this new content is missing is a corresponding role and is covered by SC 4.1.2 even now. Exception #1 to proposed SC suggests the new content could be associated with the trigger element. This SC would be triggered even when an error message is placed next to a failed field and is associated say via aria-describedby and focus is placed on the field when the form is presented with errors... because the error message is not associated with the submit button. I am assuming this form has no global message above the form like 3 errors present / form submission failed. A global message needs role=alert or aria-live=assertive. Change in count of cart or remaining characters in a text area is updated in an element that needs role=status with aria-live=polite. Thanks, Sailesh Panchang [1] https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/2 On 5/30/17, Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com> wrote: > Gregg, > The continual changes concern has been raised and discussed > (https://www.w3.org/2017/05/30-ag-minutes.html#item04) and while we don’t > believe that we have the perfect solution right now we feel like it is worth > getting this SC into the Editor’s draft so we can get additional comments. > > Regarding your other question, this is not just in response to a user > action. A news site might add articles on some interval and that is in > response to time or external events, and in that situation the site would > need to provide notification that the content was changed. > > Thanks, > AWK > > Andrew Kirkpatrick > Group Product Manager, Accessibility > Adobe > > akirkpat@adobe.com > http://twitter.com/awkawk > > From: Gregg Vanderheiden <greggvan@umd.edu<mailto:greggvan@umd.edu>> > Date: Tuesday, May 30, 2017 at 14:31 > To: Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com<mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com>> > Cc: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>> > Subject: Re: CFC: Change of Content SC > > Looks interesting. > > But before we reach consensus on this - a couple questions and > suggestion (depending on answer to question) > . > > ?? Do we have techniques for doing this? > > For example in a game or simulation - there will continual changes of > content. There is no exception for this — so is there a technique that > should be used in these situations to indicate that there are continuously > changing content? > > ?? Or is this ONLY supposed to apply to content that changes in response to > a user action. > > That would make sense - but the current language does not say this > > current language > > Programmatic notification is provided for each change of content that > indicates a user action was taken or that conveys information, unless one or > more of the following is true > > Perhaps something like > > > Programmatic notification is provided for each change of content that > RESULTS FROM A USER ACTION AND THAT indicates a user action was taken or > that conveys information, unless one or more of the following is true: > > ?? If you DON’T mean changes due to user action — then for dynamic content > (constantly changing) content is a simple notice someplace that says that > the page has continually changing content sufficient? or would the page > need to stream a constant flow of notifications through some mechanism that > is supported by AT? > > > > > Gregg > > Gregg C Vanderheiden > greggvan@umd.edu<mailto:greggvan@umd.edu> > > > > > On May 30, 2017, at 1:12 PM, Andrew Kirkpatrick > <akirkpat@adobe.com<mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com>> wrote: > > Call For Consensus — ends Thursday June 1rd at 1:00pm Boston time. > > The Working Group has reviewed and approved a new Success Criterion for > inclusion in the Editor’s Draft: Change of Content, at level AA, with the > goal of obtaining additional input external to the working group. > > Survey results: > https://www.w3.org/2002/09/wbs/35422/SCreview_May_17/results#xq10<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2002%2F09%2Fwbs%2F35422%2FSCreview_May_17%2Fresults%23xq10&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ce6860c3219a64497531f08d4a78a21ae%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636317659151993986&sdata=XDd3C%2FoLkxYh0Zp9GDHwBlOyWsfrqCT00eprA9BCzi4%3D&reserved=0> > Call minutes: > https://www.w3.org/2017/05/30-ag-minutes.html#item04<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2017%2F05%2F30-ag-minutes.html%23item04&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ce6860c3219a64497531f08d4a78a21ae%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636317659151993986&sdata=qvWrVqal3tmBNIJEGGPHj8UH2ECQxcZfZ0RMTmGh8%2F8%3D&reserved=0> > > The new SC can be reviewed here, in the context of the full draft: > https://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/change-of-content_ISSUE-2/guidelines/#change-of-content<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Frawgit.com%2Fw3c%2Fwcag21%2Fchange-of-content_ISSUE-2%2Fguidelines%2F%23change-of-content&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ce6860c3219a64497531f08d4a78a21ae%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636317659151993986&sdata=NEM9tqww%2Bi2UM0%2Bu6JOGqg2FkS3a0Dptj2DwdXnqDOE%3D&reserved=0> > > If you have concerns about this proposed consensus position that have not > been discussed already and feel that those concerns result in you “not being > able to live with” this decision, please let the group know before the CfC > deadline. > > Thanks, > AWK > > Andrew Kirkpatrick > Group Product Manager, Standards and Accessibility > Adobe > > akirkpat@adobe.com<mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com> > http://twitter.com/awkawk<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fawkawk&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ce6860c3219a64497531f08d4a78a21ae%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636317659151993986&sdata=XPxMsjofk%2FX1X0Lc1%2Bx2R%2BFEVbBoCv5yqcEWi1%2FeGm0%3D&reserved=0> > Thanks, > AWK > > Andrew Kirkpatrick > Group Product Manager, Accessibility > Adobe > > akirkpat@adobe.com<mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com> > http://twitter.com/awkawk<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fawkawk&data=02%7C01%7C%7Ce6860c3219a64497531f08d4a78a21ae%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636317659151993986&sdata=XPxMsjofk%2FX1X0Lc1%2Bx2R%2BFEVbBoCv5yqcEWi1%2FeGm0%3D&reserved=0> > >
Received on Tuesday, 30 May 2017 20:51:59 UTC