Re: CFC - Consistent Help SC

A couple of comments. Sorry coming late in process:

*1. Typo (see CAPS). Also suggested simplification *-> *For each web page
within a set of web pages that provides one or more of THE following ways
of finding help, access to at least one form of help is included in the
same relative order on each page". *Note: I can live without the
simplification though.

*2. I'm concerned that some non-experts may misinterpret a pass on this
criteria as the help functionality itself being accessible.*

Some thoughts:

   - I think the name "Consistent Help" is ambiguous. I would spell out
   that the focus is on help access in the criteria name. e.g. "Consistent
   Access to Help" or "Consistent Availability of Help" (using a less
   overloaded 'A' word ;-) or ... go back to "Findable help" which I think is
   less ambiguous.
   - Clearly state that the accessibility of the help functionality itself
   is not in scope for this specific criteria. In an ideal world though, the
   help would have to be accessible too for a pass ;)

Rick


On Fri, Apr 2, 2021 at 4:21 AM Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
wrote:

> On 30/03/2021 15:27, Alastair Campbell wrote:
> > Call For Consensus — ends 1^st April at noon Boston time.
> >
> > The Working Group has discussed the WCAG 2.2 success criteria
> > “Consistent Help” (was “Findable Help”), the latest version can be seen
> > here:
> >
> > https://w3c.github.io/wcag/guidelines/22/#consistent-help
> > <https://w3c.github.io/wcag/guidelines/22/#consistent-help>
>
> A late "I can live with this", but noting that now the understanding
> document seems slightly out of sync with the SC.
>
> "Without help, some users may abandon the task. They may also fail to
> correctly complete a task, or they may require assistance from people
> who do not necessarily keep private information secure."
>
> This seems to focus on the fact that help in general should be
> available, but that's not the requirement itself, as noted a few
> paragraphs later
>
> "While it would be best for all sites to offer at least one of these
> types of help, this SC does not require help be provided. The SC
> requires that when help is available that it be in a consistent location."
>
> The understanding document also goes on to explain how the various help
> options should be implemented/what they should or shouldn't say/contain.
> But that now seems orthogonal to the SC text itself, which focuses on
> providing a consistent location, and not how/what those help things
> should actually entail?
>
> Also wondering if the whole SC can now not simply be boiled down to "For
> each web page within a set of web pages that provides a help
> functionality, this functionality is included in the same relative order
> on each page." without needing to list the help functionalities directly
> in the SC text? And then define/list examples of help functionality
> separately/as a definition? Unless this SC tries to do more than one
> thing (kind of pressuring authors into providing at least one of these,
> though it claims not to, while on the face just saying that IF that kind
> of help is provided, it should be reachable in a consistent manner).
>
> P
> --
> Patrick H. Lauke
>
> https://www.splintered.co.uk/ | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
> https://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | https://www.deviantart.com/redux
> twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
>
>

-- 
Richard Boardman
rboardman@salesforce.com
Senior Director, Salesforce Product Accessibility