Re: Is this my error or Bobby's?

At 07:50 PM 2002-02-19 , Seth Rothberg wrote:
>Hi
>
>Bobby marks down the following code for a Priority 2 Accessibility failure to 
>"Nest headings properly." It's a violation of WAI checkpoint 3.5.
>
> <h1>1. Primary Heading</h1>
> <h2>1. Secondary Heading</h2>
> <h3>1. Tertiary Heading</h3>
> <h4>1. Quaternary Heading<h4>
> <h4>2. Quaternary Heading</h4>
> <h4>3. Quaternary Heading</h4>
> <!--
> <h3>2. Tertiary Heading</h3>
> -->
> <h2>2. Secondary Heading</h2>
> <h3>1. Tertiary Heading</h3>
> <h3>2. Tertiary Heading</h3>
> <h3>3. Tertiary Heading</h3>
>
>The problem, according to Bobby, is with the second <h2> heading. However, 
>when I uncomment the <h3> heading above it,  run the code through Bobby 
>again, it gets a triple-a pass.
>
>I'm afraid I fail to see how the original outline is at fault.
>

The rule that you are breaking is that you never have only one sub-heading at a
given level. The framing discussion (thesis paragraphs) attached to the first
H2 and its child H3 could be collapsed into one introduction for the group of
topics currently at indent level 4.  You could promote the H4s to H3s and not
trip this warning.

I am neither confirming nor denying that this should be a rule.

The actual problem is the loneliness of the the H3 header, not the occurrence
of the next H2.  The problem is discovered when one gets to the end of the
first H2 has encountered one and only one H3.  But the way the error is
identified to the user by just marking the place where the syntax coughs is
confusing for a rule like this.

Al

>Thanks,
>
>Seth
>
>p.s. sorry for the made up word quaternary.
>

Received on Thursday, 21 February 2002 08:16:39 UTC