Re: WCAG compliance question

I do not think I have misunderstood, I think I am disagreeing with your 
explanation.  Perhaps I'm being misunderstood.  If functionality is lost 
by disabling CSS, that is in and of itself *not* a WCAG conformance 
failure.  When CSS is disabled and the functionality that was coded into 
the CSS layer fails, that is merely showing that the web app relies on CSS 
to function.  In fact, there are CSS techniques that require CSS to be 
turned on so that the web app can successfully meet a success criteria. If 
disabling CSS breaks the ability to meet a success criteria, that is not 
an accessibility either, its is merely showing that the web app relies on 
CSS to meet WCAG. 

Any functionality needed by any user that is provided in CSS, and then 
lost by disabling CSS is NOT a WCAG conformance issue nor an accessibility 
issue, it is merely showing the dependence on CSS.

Relying on CSS, JavaScript, Text, HTML or any technology is not an 
accessibility issue, but as explained in WCAG, merely a dependency. 
Turning off a dependency is not an WCAG conformance issue. 

Now, having said all that, some may say that relying on a technology may 
disproportionately affect some users, and some of those user may have 
disabilities.   For example, users using older browsers and assistive 
technology that do not support WAI-ARIA mark-up, or JavaScript, or even 
really old browsers that don't support CSS will have issues.  But even 
that same disabled user, using supporting technology, will be able to 
successfully use the web app that relies on the technology - so its not a 
disability issue per se, but a lack of the availability of the supporting 
technology.  That country or language or enterprise that has the lack of 
supporting technology can and should set policies that restrict some 
technologies, but that is only a failure to meet the policy for that 
country or language or enterprise, not generally accepted WCAG conformance 
failure.  Hence WCAG A and AA are not policies in and of themselves, but 
merely success criteria that can be referenced and enforced by policy.  So 
what I'm saying is that Pearson, or IBM, or Madagascar can set its own 
policies and require company or country web apps to be able to function 
and conform to WCAG without relying on CSS.  And those same companies and 
countries can also choose to upgrade their policies, and the WCAG Success 
Criteria still remain reference-able and useful.
___________
Regards,
Phill Jenkins, 





From:   "Durham, Heather" <heather.durham@pearson.com>
To:     Phill Jenkins/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
Cc:     WAI Interest Group <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Date:   02/26/2016 05:52 PM
Subject:        Re: WCAG compliance question



I believe you may have misunderstood. Disabling CSS is not a requirement, 
but functionality that a user needs in order to use a web page shouldn't 
be coded into the CSS layer, which would then be lost if CSS is disabled.

On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 3:32 PM, Phill Jenkins <pjenkins@us.ibm.com> 
wrote:
well, the only reference to CSS in 1.3.1that I found is an advisory 
technique to encourage actually using CSS correctly: [red underline 
highlighting added]

Additional Techniques (Advisory) for 1.3.1
Although not required for conformance, the following additional techniques 
should be considered in order to make contentmore accessible. Not all 
techniques can be used or would be effective in all situations.
C22: Using CSS to control visual presentation of text(CSS) 
Using CSS rather than tables for page layout (future link)

nothing abut disabling CSS as a requirement that I could find.
___________
Regards,
Phill Jenkins, 





From:        "Durham, Heather" <heather.durham@pearson.com>
To:        Phill Jenkins/Austin/IBM@IBMUS
Cc:        WAI Interest Group <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Date:        02/26/2016 04:25 PM
Subject:        Re: WCAG compliance question



It is what I understood from this:
WCAG 2.0 ? Level A - 1.3.1 Info and Relationships:
Information, structure, and relationships conveyed through presentation 
can be programmatically determined or are available in text. (Level A)

https://www.w3.org/TR/2012/NOTE-UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20-20120103/content-structure-separation-programmatic.html


??


On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 2:47 PM, Phill Jenkins <pjenkins@us.ibm.com> 
wrote:
> Here's my take: With CSS disabled, users must be able to view, reach, 
activate and interact . . .

Are you suggesting a new success criteria for WCAG 2.x? 

or is that your individual interpretation? 

Otherwise, where in WCAG 2.0 does it require the web app to work with CSS 
disabled? 

___________
Regards,
Phill Jenkins,



-- 
Heather Durham
Accessibility SQA, HEd
Pearson
2154 E. Commons Ave.
Suite 4000
Centennial, CO  80122
USA
Learn more at pearson.com




-- 
Heather Durham
Accessibility SQA, HEd
Pearson
2154 E. Commons Ave.
Suite 4000
Centennial, CO  80122
USA
Learn more at pearson.com