- From: Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>
- Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 13:17:12 -0700
- To: "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>, "w3c-wai-ig@w3.org" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
That's an interesting question. If you do think that there is a failure whenever the scripting to load more content on a page is used, we should have a failure technique for that - anyone who wants to write up a technique (failure or success types both ok!) can submit the technique at http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/TECHS-SUBMIT/ Thanks, AWK Andrew Kirkpatrick Group Product Manager, Accessibility Adobe Systems akirkpat@adobe.com http://twitter.com/awkawk http://blogs.adobe.com/accessibility -----Original Message----- From: Patrick H. Lauke [mailto:redux@splintered.co.uk] Sent: Friday, June 21, 2013 3:16 PM To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org Subject: Re: Page length and number of links On 21/06/2013 16:30, deborah.kaplan@suberic.net wrote: > but I wonder what our > recommendation from an accessibility standpoint should be about those > pages which endlessly scroll using JavaScript, without anchors to > particular places in the page, or the ability to use the back button > to get back to where you were. Those likely already violate WCAG 2.0 in different ways, though off the top of my head I'm not 100% sure which particular SCs. At the very least, there should be a setting that disabled endless scroll and instead has a button to "Load more tweets" or whatever dynamically. P -- Patrick H. Lauke ______________________________________________________________ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com | http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ ______________________________________________________________ twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke ______________________________________________________________
Received on Friday, 21 June 2013 20:17:39 UTC