RE: Possible draft of 3.2.7

Maybe…

 
Success Criterion 3.2.7 Temporarily Visible Controls (Level AA): Provide a visible indicator that is available without mouse or keyboard focus for each control or set of controls, except when: 

* The same functionality is available through another control or set of controls on the same screen; (The COGA guidance indicates that users want to know what’s available to them, so avoiding going through an entire process to find the features is important, so I dropped the multi-step process part of this one.)  
* The temporarily visible controls appear with any action on the page (including mouse over) and remain visible for at least 3 seconds
* A mechanism is available to make temporarily visible controls persistently visible; 
* The temporarily visible controls provide keyboard-only functionality and appear on keyboard focus;
* The controls are part of a user interface for editing what is shown persistently and the user interface includes a help section that explains this;
* Hiding the visible indicator is essential to the purpose of the page.

 
And then perhaps define “visible indicator”:

 
Visible indicator: Visuals designed to indicate interactivity through either known conventions for indicating interactivity (e.g. outlined button, image of a video, profile pic, underlined links, submenu arrows), or through new conventions used within a particular set of Web pages (e.g. everything interactive within an online game is surrounded by a purple halo; everything you can edit in a drawing application has mini mouse pointer in the bottom right).

 
From: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com> 
Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2022 11:53 AM
To: Suzanne Taylor <suzanne.taylor@thingsentertainment.net>
Cc: public-cognitive-a11y-tf <public-cognitive-a11y-tf@w3.org>; w3c-waI-gl@w3. org <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Possible draft of 3.2.7

 
Hi Suzanne,

> I agree that a good next step would be to work from a draft that attempts to solve the ambiguity …

That is the bit we’re still missing.

A lot of WCAG 2.x criteria take the form: If something is communicated in one way, make sure it’s communicated in another way.

E.g. alt text, info & relationships.

Non-text contrast essentially asks you to make sure that: Whatever it is about an input that makes it an input, make sure that has contrast. If it doesn’t have anything, there is no requirement.

This SC is asking for an interface feature, which is different and more difficult.

It is a good point about making sure the test matches the requirement, but we are still missing the step of defining ‘visible indicators’ (or something else) less ambiguously. 

 
-Alastair