Re: WCAG 2.2 status - Icon Description

According to our “User Stories” doc (User needs) a User shouldn’t have to interact with the icon in order to determine its purpose.  I will try and share the doc later


On Jan 14, 2020, at 7:05 AM, Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com> wrote:
Charles wrote:
> An icon alone does not indicate action.
…
> Is there evidence from COGA that acting upon an icon to reveal a text description of the icon solves the original problem?

The original problem was: How do I know what this icon means?

We have a other SCs for:

  *   Can I discern this UI control? (Non-text contrast)
  *   Do I know this thing is interactive and how to use it? (Visual indicators)

Whether people understand a row of icons in the top corner are interactive seems to fit more into the other SCs.

Whether people would understand that you could tap & hold on an icon to get a description is relevant if we rely on that being true.


> The ideal and recommended method is display it always.

Indeed, but there are valid cases where that isn’t possible.

Maps is one example that comes to mind. Just looking at my own location:

<image001.png>
[alt= Google maps interface with various icons on the map and in the interface.]

There is some nuance here, there are icons that:

  *   definitely require a description (in red scribble outline).
  *   do require a description because there is a text label visible (green dashed outline).
  *   represent a category of thing, such as restaurants, that have a label but it isn’t for the icon directly (solid purple outline).

As the SC is written, I think the purple outlined icons would require a description.

As it happens, almost all the icons have a description available either on hover/focus or on click/select. Whether the icons on the map have a label visible also depends on your map-zoom level, they appear and disappear depending on the density of items in the map.


> a lot of challenges with and significantly limits techniques that can provide such a mechanism that conforms with other SCs and does not interfere with the original action.

Agreed, that’s the crux.

I think we can agree that it would be feasible to meet the SC in environments with hover/focus events. In that context, we probably don’t need the legend approach.

I don’t think we’ll all agree that it is feasible and usable in a touch-screen environment.

Building on the edits today, does this make sense? (Bold for changes.)

AA: “For  icons that are relied on to act as labels or instructions, a mechanism is available to display a text equivalent visually adjacent to the icon. If the mechanism is triggered by interacting with the icon, it can rely on hover, focus, click or keypress events.”

AAA: “For  icons that are relied on to act as labels or instructions, a mechanism is available to display a text equivalent visually adjacent to the icon.”

Cheers,

-Alastair