RE: Discussion on "Content on Hover or Focus"

Hi David,

Yes, it’s very fuzzy in this context, which is why better safe than sorry.  I personally do not buy an that <img … < is not a UI component, but as soon as I add a title attribute or a custom tooltip, it suddenenly becomes one.

I agree the 2nd amendment is wordier than I’d like too.  I’m open to suggestions.

Steve

From: David MacDonald [mailto:david100@sympatico.ca]
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2017 12:40 PM
To: Joshue O Connor <josh@interaccess.ie>
Cc: Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>; Repsher, Stephen J <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com>; WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Discussion on "Content on Hover or Focus"

> 1.       Use “content” to describe the trigger rather than “user interface component”.  Reasons are explained on GitHub in detail, but in summary, there’s no reason to risk saying that we’re only covering UI components as triggers.  Anything can be a trigger, and that ought to be clear.

=======
​WCAG ​
Definition:
User Interface control
​:​
a part of the content that is perceived by users as a single control for a distinct function
=========
​It's admittedly not the most elegant definition in our glossary but
under th
​is​
​
WCAG definition, anything that a user would
​perceive as
 actionable would qualify
​ including big images with hovers etc..​
. I think this covers the concern.

​I could live with Steve's second amendment, although I find it quite wordy, and might cause us another cycle which we can't afford before September. How about we take it up in the next draft..​



Cheers,
David MacDonald



CanAdapt Solutions Inc.

Tel:  613.235.4902

LinkedIn
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>

twitter.com/davidmacd<http://twitter.com/davidmacd>

GitHub<https://github.com/DavidMacDonald>

www.Can-Adapt.com<http://www.can-adapt.com/>



  Adapting the web to all users
            Including those with disabilities

If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy<http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html>

On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Joshue O Connor <josh@interaccess.ie<mailto:josh@interaccess.ie>> wrote:
Just to speak to Steve's first point - I prefer 'user interface component' as it implies something that the user will interact with, whereas content is generic. I do however appreciate that you mean the behaviour can be applied to anything. This is something that we can for sure debate more over the coming months- if the SC makes the cut.

Thanks

Josh


Andrew Kirkpatrick wrote:

Steve,
I don’t think that either of these issues weaken the SC at all, and certainly not significantly, as I indicate in my responses below:

https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/75#issuecomment-321834330

https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/75#issuecomment-321837762


The SC, taken as a whole, addresses the concern that people might want to say that users can reposition a tooltip by moving the pointer to a different spot on the trigger since the support required for keyboard users is one of the requirements here and if you have information only available on hover then you will run afoul of 2.1.1.

Thanks,
AWK

Andrew Kirkpatrick
Group Product Manager, Accessibility
Adobe

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


From: "Repsher, Stephen J" <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com<mailto:stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com>>
Date: Friday, August 11, 2017 at 11:05
To: Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com<mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com>>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
Subject: RE: CFC - Content on Hover or Focus

-1
This CFC puts me in the difficult position of accepting an SC I certainly agree will help PWDs, versus accepting unnecessary changes that have weakened it considerably.  In the short time this was revised, I have been commenting on GitHub [1,2,3], but could not participate in the call to voice my concerns.

I’m lobbying for 2 simple changes, and then I’d be a +1:

1.       Use “content” to describe the trigger rather than “user interface component”.  Reasons are explained on GitHub in detail, but in summary, there’s no reason to risk saying that we’re only covering UI components as triggers.  Anything can be a trigger, and that ought to be clear.

2.       Specify the parameters of the positioning, rather than just saying “can be repositioned”.  I proposed the following:

a.       Either the additional content does not obscure any essential content within the trigger, the additional content can be dismissed by the user, or the additional content can be positioned by the user to not obscure essential content of the trigger without requiring a specific pointer location.

[1] https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/75#issuecomment-321443487<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fw3c%2Fwcag21%2Fissues%2F75%23issuecomment-321443487&data=02%7C01%7C%7C253a107211864e39311008d4e0ca79d7%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636380607616045786&sdata=Wngt6hE%2FAX%2BFmEdWGiCh%2Fxb3COt2XbMOFXAj00i2fkk%3D&reserved=0>
[2] https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/75#issuecomment-321653668<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fw3c%2Fwcag21%2Fissues%2F75%23issuecomment-321653668&data=02%7C01%7C%7C253a107211864e39311008d4e0ca79d7%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636380607616045786&sdata=FWDVu73HUssOtEoWOdqMql7p%2FKLqBSjWfNFPhgg4MnA%3D&reserved=0>
[3]https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/75#issuecomment-321823396<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fw3c%2Fwcag21%2Fissues%2F75%23issuecomment-321823396&data=02%7C01%7C%7C253a107211864e39311008d4e0ca79d7%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636380607616045786&sdata=ltGyomMcpVoF32s2oxXXdC%2FVRzxK20vBao81cBlXsa8%3D&reserved=0>

Steve

From: Andrew Kirkpatrick [mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2017 11:24 PM
To: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>>
Subject: CFC - Content on Hover or Focus
Importance: High

Call For Consensus — ends Monday August 14th at 11:30pm Boston time.

The Working Group has reviewed and approved a new related Success Criteria for inclusion in the Editor’s Draft: Content on Hover or Focus, at level AA, with the goal of obtaining additional input external to the working group.

Call minutes: https://www.w3.org/2017/08/10-ag-minutes.html#item03<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2F2017%2F08%2F10-ag-minutes.html%23item03&data=02%7C01%7C%7C253a107211864e39311008d4e0ca79d7%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636380607616045786&sdata=sXQqFZPKhYGWvsg8BEctM6loQ3YA2zC%2BzyVsevOLRUo%3D&reserved=0>

The new SC can be reviewed here, in the context of the full draft:
https://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/popup-interference_ISSUE-75/guidelines/#content-on-hover-or-focus<https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Frawgit.com%2Fw3c%2Fwcag21%2Fpopup-interference_ISSUE-75%2Fguidelines%2F%23content-on-hover-or-focus&data=02%7C01%7C%7C253a107211864e39311008d4e0ca79d7%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636380607616045786&sdata=5G4Kb0JbtLs5jTxLr35wKp13JM3f6miDsBAK1%2FLyi10%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, 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%7C253a107211864e39311008d4e0ca79d7%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636380607616045786&sdata=yoRx1awYWUnY4%2Bjy4qrWW3KhoQ9w1zXaAY03R4qJ9ig%3D&reserved=0>


--
Joshue O Connor
Director | InterAccess.ie