RE: Visible controls

Wilco wrote:
> By definition, something can not be a UIC until it is perceivable in some way. Taken literally, this SC is self-defeating.

I’d go back to my comment that WCAG SCs apply (by default) in whatever state the page is in, including whether a UIC is hidden or visible. It is perceived in certain states of the page.

Still, the question is really about whether the SC is conveyed as well as it can be, I’m trying to keep an open mind, this could go either way.

I’ll include both options in the survey for next week.

Sarah wrote:
> For example, a heading that is perceivable and identifiable as a heading element, but turns out also to be a UIC. The additional information needed to identify the element as a UIC, e.g., a pencil icon or an outline or underline, displays only on pointer hover or keyboard focus.

Interestingly, like Jon I’m sure I’ve seen examples where the way to edit the heading (or data in a table, or a comment) was to click on it. There were no hover indicators so this SC wouldn’t apply at all.

The bigger issue I’m struggling with is that we want to catch the example outlined above, but it is logically just the same as the media controls example in the understanding document<https://raw.githack.com/w3c/wcag/wcag22-visible-controls-update/understanding/22/visible-controls.html>.

I.e. it is a bit of content with no controls showing, which you hover over to see the controls.

-Alastair