Re: Support as an SC prefix?

This is the intent of the working group.    The only clarification is in when it would be safe to assume the user’s browser could do it.    The WG felt that if the feature was in popular and free browsers (such as Firefox ) then that was sufficient.    It was not sufficient that it was in a special browser that you had to buy.    It was not required that it be in all browsers. 

But other than that clarification - your description appears to me to be spot on with the intent of the WG.   

Gregg


Gregg C Vanderheiden
greggvan@umd.edu



> On Mar 8, 2017, at 6:34 PM, Work <james.nurthen@oracle.com> wrote:
> 
> I have always read the WCAG2 “Mechanism is available” to mean that you must ensure that either the user agent the user can do it - or if that can’t be guaranteed (i.e. the user could be using a user agent which does not support it) then the content must provide that support itself.
> 
> For example 1.4.2 states that a mechanism must be available to pause audio or control its volume independently from the system volume. Pretty much every browser now supports muting an individual tab. Can we essentially assume this is now a pass a a browser supports this so it is now the user agent’s issue rather than the content’s problem?
> 
> Regards,
> James
> 
> 
> 
> On Mar 8, 2017, 9:16 AM -0800, Repsher, Stephen J <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com>, wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Steve
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Alastair Campbell [mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2017 11:44 AM
>> To: Repsher, Stephen J <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com
>> Cc: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
>> Subject: Re: Support as an SC prefix?
>> 
>> Repsher, Stephen J wrote:
>>> "mechanism" may not be the absolute best word, but it is well-established throughout 2.0 with a clear definition that the author is not necessarily fully liable and links to several other definitions.
>> 
>> That is true, but we still had umpteen comments along the lines of: You can’t require people to put a widget on the page!
>> 
>> People assumed that is what it meant (and this is from experts in WCAG).
>> [Steve] Agreed. Time to understand may be the best solution though.
>> 
>>> ultimately the word "support" should not be added as all other criteria have names which are nouns, not command sentences.
>> 
>> I don’t think it is that clear cut, resize text, use of color, and pause/stop/hide come to mind.
>> [Steve] Touche :)
>> 
>> All I’m suggesting (as per the commenter) is an indicator at the start of some SCs, so linearize is currently:
>> Linearization: A mechanism is available to view content as a single column, except for parts of the content where the spatial layout is essential to the function and understanding of the content.
>> 
>> That would become:
>> Support linearization: Content can be viewed as a single column, except for parts of the content where the spatial layout is essential to the function and understanding of the content.
>> [Steve] My point is just that you would also have to be willing to change 2.4.1 to "Bypass Blocks: Blocks of content that are repeated on multiple web pages can be bypassed." (i.e. remove any mention of a mechanism)
>> 
>> There are 3 or 4 other SCs that would apply to currently.
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> 
>> -Alastair
>> 
>>