W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > October to December 2013

RE: Technique H25 / real life

From: Foliot, John <john.foliot@chase.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 19:44:12 +0000
To: "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>, "w3c-wai-ig@w3.org" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <D0DBF1AE71D5D1448811AC41795190740EAB4376@SCACMX021.exchad.jpmchase.net>
Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
> So, overall it's a failure to meet level A, yes. However, that has
> nothing to do with Steve's "we should not allow stuff that fails a
> normative requirement" in reference to two separate SCs? Unless you
> stipulate explicitly that the pass/fail of any SC also hinges on the
> solution actually used to achieve the pass not contravening any other
> SC of the same level...which seems pointlessly complex, because - as
> you say - it'll fail overall regardless for that level.
> So, I still contend: <title> in <body> would pass 2.4.2, but fail
> 4.1.1.

OK, sure. And vinyl screen-doors won't rust, so go ahead and put them on your submarine :)

This is probably a great example of why I get so frustrated that, once again, "accessibility" has been reduced to a checklist of does and don'ts. Simply "passing" 2.4.2 does absolutely nothing to improve accessibility if overall the page remains "broken" in other ways, conversely, if it *isn't* broken then why do we insist on 4.1.1 as being an A level requirement (when clearly, here, it doesn't matter)?

I agree with Steve, it is the whole of the outcomes that matter, the bowl of spaghetti as it were, rather than the individual noodles that are in the bowl: failure is failure and splitting the hairs that suggest that you pass 2.4.2 but fail 4.1.1 is somehow less "bad" seems rather pointless to me.


This transmission may contain information that is privileged, confidential, legally privileged, and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law.  If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein (including any reliance thereon) is STRICTLY PROHIBITED.  Although this transmission and any attachments are believed to be free of any virus or other defect that might affect any computer system into which it is received and opened, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is virus free and no responsibility is accepted by JPMorgan Chase & Co., its subsidiaries and affiliates, as applicable, for any loss or damage arising in any way from its use.  If you received this transmission in error, please immediately contact the sender and destroy the material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format. Thank you.
Received on Wednesday, 30 October 2013 19:44:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:36:46 UTC