- From: David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
- Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2018 15:53:15 -0500
- To: Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@levelaccess.com>
- Cc: "Repsher, Stephen J" <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com>, Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>, "White, Jason J" <jjwhite@ets.org>, Melanie Philipp <melanie.philipp@deque.com>, Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>, "Abma, J.D. (Jake)" <Jake.Abma@ing.nl>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAAdDpDbkdx=-zcG0Gn_wF=KA_CcY6btX8Z-fxY-NWknER9xNCw@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Steve I have to confess... I've never made that distinction that if you move to an actionable control with an arrow key rather than a tab key it is not a focusable element. Is there anywhere official you can point me (and Jonathan) to that makes that distinction. Cheers, David MacDonald *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.* Tel: 613.235.4902 LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100> 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 Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 3:43 PM, Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@levelaccess.com> wrote: > In my opinion switching between tabs with arrow keys is changing focus and > selection. Just as moving up and down in an ARIA combo box with pop up > list that takes focus moves both selection and focus. > > Jonathan > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Jan 9, 2018, at 2:40 PM, Repsher, Stephen J < > stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com> wrote: > > I’ll try to reply to various comments throughout this thread… > > > > First, it is unclear to me from issue #650 whether or not the commenter is > talking about true tabbed interfaces, or simply menus that respond to > tabbing. However, it doesn’t really matter what the UI component actually > is but rather how it functions using a keyboard or pointer. If stuff > appears on focus or hover, then it applies. > > > > With regard to the applicability to tabbed interfaces (i.e. > role=”tab”)…The answer depends on how the keyboard and pointer interactions > are implemented. Taking the ARIA Authoring Practices example, Andrew is > correct in saying that the SC is not applicable because keyboard focus on > the tab is not what makes its associated tabpanel appear. The tablist > receives focus and simply transfers it to the currently displayed tab, then > the next focusable element is the tabpanel. There are only 2 ways to make > the “additional” tab panel content appear: > > 1. Click the tab with the pointer, or > > 2. Move focus into the tablist, then use the arrow keys to select a > new tab. This is functionally equivalent to a <select> which displays > different content onblur or on selection. > > Thus, there is no real applicability for the SC in this example. And > furthermore, most tabs that I experience pretty much use an onclick() > approach since it’s the easiest way to also be mobile-friendly, so there’s > no applicability for most tabs in the wild either. > > > > So, could the SC apply to a tabbed interface? Yes, certainly, but only if > it truly works on just hover and/or focus, and that would be a horrible > user experience for everyone in most tab applications. > > > > I’m happy to add some stuff to the Understanding discussing tabs to > reflect all this. > > > > With regard to defining “additional content”… I view this as already > defined by the SC language itself, i.e. anything that requires an element > to be focused or hovered before it becomes visible is the additional > content. Referring to it as “additional” is nothing more than a > convenience so that it is clear what is being talked about in the 3 > conditions and has no other meaning beyond that. I think the Understanding > already makes this clear. > > > > With regard to going back to popup, popover, or scoping to “overlay”… This > was extremely confusing for many folks even with a clear definition, and > that definition would need to scope it to the same content as is now, so I > do not agree with going back down that winding road. Moreover, scoping to > only overlays misses the point of the Hoverable and Persistent conditions, > i.e. those conditions are there to assist with viewing and operating the > additional content and it’s irrelevant whether or not anything else is > being obscured. > > > > With regard to the general notion of additional content that is not > overlaying or obscuring anything else... I originally had this in the > Dismissable bullet, but the working group discussed it and decided to > remove it. That is, it originally read: “..., unless the additional > content communicates an input error or does not obscure any other > content.” I’m fine with adding that back in if the group feels it is > important, but that seems irrelevant to issue #650. > > > > Steve > > > > *From:* Andrew Kirkpatrick [mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com <akirkpat@adobe.com>] > > *Sent:* Tuesday, January 09, 2018 9:13 AM > *To:* David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>; White, Jason J < > jjwhite@ets.org> > *Cc:* Melanie Philipp <melanie.philipp@deque.com>; Alastair Campbell < > acampbell@nomensa.com>; Abma, J.D. (Jake) <Jake.Abma@ing.nl>; WCAG < > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>; Repsher, Stephen J <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com> > *Subject:* Re: Issue 650 Does the Hover or focus SC apply to tabbed > interfaces? > > > > Would be good to hear from Steve about David’s last question (“without > moving the pointer”)… > > > > Thanks, > > AWK > > > > Andrew Kirkpatrick > > Group Product Manager, Accessibility > > Adobe > > > > akirkpat@adobe.com > > http://twitter.com/awkawk > > > > *From: *David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca> > *Date: *Tuesday, January 9, 2018 at 09:09 > *To: *"White, Jason J" <jjwhite@ets.org> > *Cc: *Melanie Philipp <melanie.philipp@deque.com>, Alastair Campbell < > acampbell@nomensa.com>, "Abma, J.D. (Jake)" <Jake.Abma@ing.nl>, WCAG < > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, "Repsher, Stephen J" <stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com> > *Subject: *Re: Issue 650 Does the Hover or focus SC apply to tabbed > interfaces? > *Resent-From: *WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org> > *Resent-Date: *Tuesday, January 9, 2018 at 09:06 > > > > I agree with going back to using popup, or something similar and then > defining it. > > > > For me, "overlay" makes me think of a light box, dialogue box etc., which > is not generally a hover based popup... but could live with it if it's > defined or clear in another way the the SC is not talking about those > things. > > > > I also hope we address the first bullet regarding closing the popup > "without moving the pointer". The pointer can't do anything without moving, > can it? > > > Cheers, > David MacDonald > > > > *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.* > > Tel: 613.235.4902 <(613)%20235-4902> > > LinkedIn > > <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.linkedin.com%2Fin%2Fdavidmacdonald100&data=02%7C01%7Cakirkpat%40adobe.com%7C1b834c3267a1401141d408d5576aa824%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636511037986556013&sdata=RXjoK%2BQSrASybKHpuekjkWn8gCASZXRhmtskbWEecAE%3D&reserved=0> > > twitter.com/davidmacd > <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fdavidmacd&data=02%7C01%7Cakirkpat%40adobe.com%7C1b834c3267a1401141d408d5576aa824%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636511037986556013&sdata=VFyQOEHH4rswqjT4fAxYx1Nq1%2FRuiLRgySJXsm8Lvjw%3D&reserved=0> > > GitHub > <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2FDavidMacDonald&data=02%7C01%7Cakirkpat%40adobe.com%7C1b834c3267a1401141d408d5576aa824%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636511037986556013&sdata=R9guICJvEtWHXiOrw7pHEZsN7hGJKEMGDg%2B57iQtKdE%3D&reserved=0> > > www.Can-Adapt.com > <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.can-adapt.com%2F&data=02%7C01%7Cakirkpat%40adobe.com%7C1b834c3267a1401141d408d5576aa824%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636511037986556013&sdata=y%2Fl%2B%2BjyVXSsCqz9C4HEh%2B%2FdINxl%2FupDQs2s%2FQfgEYoI%3D&reserved=0> > > > > * Adapting the web to all users* > > * Including those with disabilities* > > > > If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy > <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.davidmacd.com%2Fdisclaimer.html&data=02%7C01%7Cakirkpat%40adobe.com%7C1b834c3267a1401141d408d5576aa824%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636511037986556013&sdata=yFSCmytaEgts7eziLkG2UoY2g1sKhfg2r%2F8htWTUvvg%3D&reserved=0> > > > > On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 8:53 AM, White, Jason J <jjwhite@ets.org> wrote: > > I think we should explore this option to see whether it covers the desired > cases – and only them. > > > > *From:* Melanie Philipp [mailto:melanie.philipp@deque.com] > *Sent:* Tuesday, January 9, 2018 8:35 AM > *To:* White, Jason J <jjwhite@ets.org> > *Cc:* Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>; Abma, J.D. (Jake) < > Jake.Abma@ing.nl>; WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>; Repsher, Stephen J < > stephen.j.repsher@boeing.com> > *Subject:* Re: Issue 650 Does the Hover or focus SC apply to tabbed > interfaces? > > > > Did you explore the word "overlay"? As in: > > > > "When pointer hover or keyboard focus triggers additional content* that > overlays other content*, the following are true:" > > > > Perhaps no new definition would be required with this approach. > > > Melanie Philipp, CPACC, WAS > Senior Digital Accessibility Consultant > 540-848-5220 <(540)%20848-5220> > www.deque.com > <https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.deque.com&data=02%7C01%7Cjjwhite%40ets.org%7Ce8e6783165f245ebfec608d55765cf55%7C0ba6e9b760b34fae92f37e6ddd9e9b65%7C0%7C0%7C636511017148326835&sdata=l5ZDl1U%2BmyHTTmbDvxEhoE1kpRrgVYmZupozmjm7gWM%3D&reserved=0> > > > > On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 7:59 AM, White, Jason J <jjwhite@ets.org> wrote: > > > > > > *From:* Alastair Campbell [mailto:acampbell@nomensa.com] > *Sent:* Tuesday, January 9, 2018 5:00 AM > > > > I agree it would help to have something like ‘pop-over’ as the target of > the SC. I’m fairly sure we did at one stage, Steve (CCed) might be able to > remember why we dropped that? > > *[Jason] The term was used (with disagreement about whether it should be > “popup” or “popover”), but I don’t recall there being a definition. It was > relatively uncontroversial, as I recall, that these terms did not have a > generally accepted meaning that was clear or precise enough to meet our > testability requirements.* > > > > > ------------------------------ > > This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or > confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for whom > it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this e-mail > in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute, or > take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and delete > it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited. > > > > Thank you for your compliance. > ------------------------------ > > > > > ------------------------------ > > This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or > confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for whom > it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this e-mail > in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute, or > take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and delete > it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited. > > > > Thank you for your compliance. > ------------------------------ > > > >
Received on Tuesday, 9 January 2018 20:53:40 UTC