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

Re: Technique H25 / real life

From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 20:30:11 +0000
Message-ID: <52716C53.8040307@splintered.co.uk>
To: "Foliot, John" <john.foliot@chase.com>, "w3c-wai-ig@w3.org" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
On 30/10/2013 19:44, Foliot, John wrote:
> 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

Passing it if it actually achieves success 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)?

We insist on it because it's a separate facet of what's being tested.

> 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. </rant>

Who is making a value judgement here? Did I say "one pass and one fail 
is better than two fails"? No. You can send the whole bowl of spaghetti 
back to the kitchen and call the whole plate inedible ("if does not meet 
level A"), but when doing a food inspection/critique there's nothing 
wrong with differentiating and saying which part of the whole was ok and 
which one wasn't ("the noodles were fine but the minced beef was raw" / 
"it does have a <title> that is read out by all current user agents, but 
it does fail validation").

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 Wednesday, 30 October 2013 20:30:34 UTC

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