Re: Text Links (WCAG 2.0/2.4.4 and 2.4.9)

An accessibility based forum showed an example of 2.4.4 and 2.4.9 with their own site. The link did not equal the title of the page, but the link vs. title was very close in order to meet 2.4.9.
 
I will be using their sample for the Army and related links. 


--- On Mon, 8/10/09, Chris Reeve <chrisreeve15@yahoo.com> wrote:


From: Chris Reeve <chrisreeve15@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Text Links (WCAG 2.0/2.4.4 and 2.4.9)
To: "Michael S Elledge" <elledge@msu.edu>
Cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org, public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Date: Monday, August 10, 2009, 6:14 PM







Michael, your comments are based on screen reader accessibility. If I wanted a screen-reader reasponse, I would ask the National Federation of the Blind, the American Federation of the Blind, or Freedom Scientic.
 
I wanted a response to confirm that my that will or will not conflict with the associated techniques for 2.4.4. Our agency has decided to adopt 2.4.4, but not 2.4.9.
 
1) Does the fact that we will reject 2.4.9, and the sample I gave cause a 2.4.4 failure, or a 2.4.9 failure. 
 2) Is the technique "Sufficient" enough so even if we decided to reject 2.4.9, we accidentally pass?  
 3) Does 2.4.4 still pass? 
 
4) For Sufficient Techniques associated with 2.4.4, will we have to change the text link to match the title of the destination link?
 
5) For Sufficient Techniques associated with 2.4.9, will we have to change the text link to match the title of the destination link?
 
I am looking for a general answer for Sufficient Techniques associated with 2.4.4 and with 2.4.9.

--- On Mon, 8/10/09, Michael S Elledge <elledge@msu.edu> wrote:


From: Michael S Elledge <elledge@msu.edu>
Subject: Re: Text Links (WCAG 2.0/2.4.4 and 2.4.9)
To: "Chris Reeve" <chrisreeve15@yahoo.com>
Cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org, public-comments-wcag20@w3.org
Date: Monday, August 10, 2009, 5:18 PM


Hi Chris--

It's important to think about accessibility in a broader context, in other words, how well your Website (and in this case Website links) will assist a person using adaptive technology.

For example, someone who is blind cannot see the surrounding text, and will have to rely on either the content of your link alone or the content of your link and the preceding text. So my suggestion would be to have your link text show: "U.S. Army Homepage." That way someone using a screen reader will hear "U.S." instead of "us" and will know the destination page ("homepage").

Hope that helps. This is my opinion, however. I do not sit on a W3C advisory committee so don't represent the W3C brain-trust.  :^)

Best regards,

Mike Elledge
Assistant Director
Usability & Accessibility Center
Michigan  State University

Chris Reeve wrote:
> I have a question. My site has a description to a federal site at the Army. My text link is "US Army" without quotes. The title tag of the U.S. Army's homepage is "The United States Army Homepage".
>  Does my description (U.S. Army) still pass 2.4.4?
> Does either 2.4.4 or 2.4.9 require my text link to be identical to the title tag of the site (The United States Army Homepage)?. If so, which criteria?
>   
>