W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > July to September 2017

Re: new wording for Undo

From: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2017 14:36:05 +0000
To: lisa.seeman <lisa.seeman@zoho.com>
CC: David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>, "W3c-Wai-Gl-Request@W3. Org" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <B0AE698B-F5D4-4900-ABD0-BEE9B4A3C7ED@nomensa.com>
Hi Lisa,

> Changes in context definition includes changes in focus. Should we exclude that here?

The requirement is that users can return to the previous context (or step), it doesn’t need to say how, so I don’t think we need to specify that.

I’m not clear what “non-dependant” data is, in previous comments I said I didn’t think it was needed. (Maybe someone else suggested that was needed?)

Was there a problem with the one iterated with David & Jason? Making a couple of tweaks:

When data is entered in a sequence of steps that need to be completed in order to accomplish an activity, users can return to any previous step to make corrections without loss of data, except when:

•            it would undermine privacy or security;

•            the user has confirmed the data entry;

•            doing so prevents an essential function of the content;

•            the data is no longer controlled by the site;

•            the user has not interacted with the site for 24 hours.

NB: I’m not sure the “data is no longer controlled by the site” is needed, if that were the case surely that would (should) have been a confirmation step?



From: "lisa.seeman" <lisa.seeman@zoho.com>
Date: Thursday, 20 July 2017 at 14:30
To: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
Cc: David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: Re: new wording for Undo

Agreed. Let's limit it to return to the previous  context and  correct data entry.

I think that takes us to
Undo: Users can return to the previous  context and correct data entry without loss of non-dependent data except when:

Changes in context definition includes changes in focus. Should we exclude that here? or just have a conferment technique  such as:
changes in focus  can be reversed via the  keyboard navigation

All the best

Lisa Seeman

LinkedIn<http://il.linkedin.com/in/lisaseeman/>, Twitter<https://twitter.com/SeemanLisa>

---- On Wed, 19 Jul 2017 16:17:53 +0300 Alastair Campbell<acampbell@nomensa.com> wrote ----
Hi Lisa,

> I think the use case is inclined in "Users can undo actions, return to the previous context "
> Do you see a problem with that?

The problem I see is that there are three items there:
- Undo actions
- return to previous context
- correct data entry.

Which overlap (e.g. Data-entry is an action, returning to a previous step might be an action?), and then it isn't clear what the exceptions apply to. The exceptions (as written) mean that all three items are ignored if the exception applies, and I don't think that's what you want?

I initially saw the 'undo actions' as a description of what the next two are, I didn't realise that was something you were trying to implement universally. In which case, I don't understand how that could work, it needs qualifying in some way. (What's an action? Clicking a link? Moving a slider? Clicking next on a gallery/carousel?)

A general "the user can undo any action" is unreasonable, my mind boggles at trying to do that across all widgets on all websites even with the exceptions.

The reason I asked about the intent was to work out if the scenario was data-entry driven, and the steps aspect was scoping that scenario. I thought it was so went in that direction.



Received on Thursday, 20 July 2017 14:36:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 21:08:15 UTC