Hi Sailesh, The question we are struggling to answer, at least in a WCAG 2.x framework, is: What constitutes a visual cue? I’m afraid placement of the guideline is a secondary consideration because if we can’t answer that, we’ll have to defer the SC. Kind regards, -Alastair From: Sailesh Panchang Alastair, The question I have is why is this requirement not being considered under Principle 1: Perceivable The description on the "Understanding" page suggests all the groups listed there are unable to perceive the controls. This is not different from a piece of text that is really a link but has no underline or other visual distinctive trait to convey that the element is an operable element. Depending on the context and functionality, if the controls get exposed in a logical order, or by the presence of a visual cue (and role/state etc.) the user is informed that user action is needed to access child / related controls, the content will be accessible. That is what is covered by "Making Content Usable for People with Cognitive and Learning Disabilities" Is this not already covered by WCAG 2.0 SCs? The Understanding doc for proposed SC 3.2.7 states: "Some design approaches hide controls and require certain user interactions, such as mouseover, to reveal them (both visually and programmatically)". My take: Unless the design includes a visual cue , even an individual without any disability whatsoever will not be able to figure out that the element needs to be operated upon via mouseover or such to reveal related / child controls. This is bad design impacting everyone and surely an accessibility barrier. Thanks and respectfully, Sailesh
Received on Wednesday, 27 April 2022 13:39:53 UTC