Re: Is content on hover only a WCAG failure?

Hi Jon,

I think there is a bit of a disconnect here. It isn't whether or not the
additional content is in-page, or linked content (you
​r​
@longdesc example), but rather the following use-case:

> Again, let’s extend that logic… Does that mean that if I have 5 buttons
on the page that perform the same function, I only need to make one of them
keyboard accessible? (Steve R)

(Remember, this thread started with the question "*If content appears only
on hover, i.e. the trigger is not focusable, does that *always* constitute
a WCAG 2.0 failure?*")

My initial reaction to
​Steve's
scenario is "No - all of the buttons would need to be keyboard
​ ​
accessible" (even though, as
​<
button
​>​
s, they already are)
​. But extending upon that, if supplemental information (content) for those
buttons​ *is* being provided via @title on all five of those
'widgets', then yes, all 5 widgets need to expose that information (even if
it is the same information for all 5 instances), which seems to be in
disagreement with James' assertion.
Or do others disagree with that?
​ (I am also assuming we agree that *onmouseover=”showTooltip()”​ *alone is
insufficient and a failure of 2.1.1)

The problem then is getting to the content, not how the content is
functionally being provided in code (which, sadly, is why even though
@longdesc is a conformant attribute, its lack of universal user-agent
support significantly weakens its usefulness in production. But hey, with
regard to @longdesc, I tried. :-) )

​JF​


On Wed, Oct 18, 2017 at 12:14 PM, Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@levelaccess.com>
wrote:

> I agree with James – the WCAG conformance requirements indicate that
> alternative content can be used on the same or different page to make the
> page conformant as long as it does not interfere.  This is a core principle
> of WCAG – so it is a little alarming that this coming up in 2017.
>
>
>
> Sometimes, supplemental information may be available from another page for
> information on a page. The longdesc attribute in HTML is an example. With
> longdesc, a long description of a graphic might be on a separate page
> that the user can jump to from the page with the graphic. This makes it
> clear that such content is considered part of the Web page, so that
> requirement #2 is satisfied for the combined set of Web pages considered as
> a single Web page. Alternatives can also be provided on the same page. For
> example creating an equivalent to a user interface control. (
> https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/conformance.html)
>
>
>
> Jonathan
>
>
>
> Jonathan Avila
>
> Chief Accessibility Officer
>
> *Level Access, inc.* (formerly SSB BART Group, inc.)
>
> jon.avila@levelaccess.com
>
> 703.637.8957 <(703)%20637-8957> (Office)
>
> Visit us online: Website <http://www.levelaccess.com/> | Twitter
> <https://twitter.com/LevelAccessA11y> | Facebook
> <https://www.facebook.com/LevelAccessA11y> | LinkedIn
> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/level-access> | Blog
> <http://www.levelaccess.com/blog/>
>
> *Looking to boost your accessibility knowledge? Check out our free
> webinars!* <http://www.ssbbartgroup.com/webinars/>
>
>
>
> The information contained in this transmission may be attorney privileged
> and/or confidential information intended for the use of the individual or
> entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended
> recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination,
> distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.
>
>
>
> *From:* James Nurthen [mailto:james.nurthen@oracle.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, October 18, 2017 12:43 PM
> *To:* Repsher, Stephen J; John Foliot
> *Cc:* WCAG
> *Subject:* Re: Is content on hover only a WCAG failure?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 10/18/2017 6:27 AM, Repsher, Stephen J wrote:
>
> But title doesn't show on focus for mouse users (except on IE/Edge with
> recent windows) so the text is not available to most keyboard users.
> However, in this example it is not a problem as the title element is not
> really providing any content which is useful.
>
> *[Steve] Following that logic through to technology independence, that
> means you feel a custom tooltip using the onmouseover event only is okay in
> some situations?  Does that not contradict F54? *
>
> If it isn't providing a "function" then it would be ok - or if the same
> "function" were available in another way then yes it would be ok. F54 talks
> about being the only means to invoke the scripting function. If the
> scripting function is to display some information then so long as there is
> another way to display this information this would be ok.
>
>
>
>
> If I had provided a useful title in this example then it would be a
> failure except if I could get to that information easily in another way. So
> again - if content only appears on hover - it is not always a failure. It
> is not a failure if that information is either useless or easily available
> in another way for keyboard users.
>
> *[Steve] But if I follow the letter of the law in 2.1.1, there is no such
> exception.  It seems we must decide either the display of hover content is
> part of the functionality or it isn’t.  If you argue it isn’t then I
> suppose the question falls to 1.3.1, but again there’s no exception for
> useless or repetitive information.*
>
> 2.1.1 talks about functionality of the content where functionality is "
> processes <https://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-WCAG20-20081211/#processdef> and
> outcomes achievable through user action" and processes are "
>
> series of user actions where each action is required in order to complete
> an activity
>
> *Example 1: *Successful use of a series of Web pages on a shopping site
> requires users to view alternative products, prices and offers, select
> products, submit an order, provide shipping information and provide payment
> information.
>
> *Example 2: *An account registration page requires successful completion
> of a Turing test before the registration form can be accessed."
>
>
>
> If the content provided by hover is provided in another way then the
> processes and the outcomes are achievable through user action.
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> James
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Regards, James
>
> James Nurthen | Principal Engineer, Accessibility
> Phone: +1 650 506 6781 <+1%20650%20506%206781> | Mobile: +1 415 987 1918
> <+1%20415%20987%201918> | Video: james.nurthen@oracle.com
> Oracle Corporate Architecture
> 500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood City, CA 94065
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=500+Oracle+Parkway+%7C+Redwood+City,+CA+94065&entry=gmail&source=g>
> Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect
> the environment
>



-- 
John Foliot
Principal Accessibility Strategist
Deque Systems Inc.
john.foliot@deque.com

Advancing the mission of digital accessibility and inclusion