Re: Visible controls

Hey folks,

> David wrote:
> I've never heard anyone say "a modal dialog is not a UIC because
sometimes it's not visible."

What I'm saying is that a component is only a UIC while it is perceivable.
That goes for a modal; we don't apply 4.1.2 until the modal is actually
rendered. That same logic applies to this SC. Until that hidden control is
perceivable, it by definition is not a UIC.

> Alastair wrote:
> 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.

By definition it is not possible for a component to be a UIC in a state
where it isn't perceivable. It's like saying you are driving a parked car.
Whatever the rules are while you're driving, they do not apply when the car
is parked.

Pretty much the same thing as far as I can tell. We don't require buttons
to have a role / name / etc. while it's hidden. 4.1.2 does not apply to
hidden components, because while hidden, they aren't UICs.

This state stuff is very tricky. We can look at SC 1.4.13 Content on Hover
or Focus <https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#content-on-hover-or-focus> for
inspiration on this. In that one, we were far more explicit about exactly
in what state to apply the SC, and under what circumstance; and even for
that one, when we wrote up rules for it in ACT we found there was a lot
left out.


On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 10:47 PM Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
wrote:

> 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
>


-- 
*Wilco Fiers*
Axe-core product owner - Co-facilitator WCAG-ACT - Chair ACT-R


Join me at axe-con <http://deque.com/axe-con> 2021: a free digital
accessibility conference.