W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > October to December 2016

RE: SC 1.3.3 - text alternative or no visible label?

From: Adam Cooper <cooperad@bigpond.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2016 20:07:50 +1100
To: "'Jonathan Avila'" <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <001701d2449f$e71cd140$b55673c0$@bigpond.com>
Hi Jonathan,

 

Thanks for the response. I did look through the archives before posting, but
couldn’t find anything that covered this issue. I’ll log the success
criterion assignment of the failure technique as you suggest. 

 

To my way of thinking, the example I provided touches on a few specific
issues:

 

Firstly, the understanding of what the orientation and the change in
orientation means.

 

Second, the decidability of the meaning of the control (whether it means
current state or outcome of activating)

 

Third, the broader question of meaning conveyed by  graphical content (i.e.,
pictographic). 

 

I’d be interested to know what the WAI-IG thinks because it will inform my
practice.

 

Cheers,

Adam 

 

 

 

From: Jonathan Avila [mailto:jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com] 
Sent: Monday, November 21, 2016 10:26 AM
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Subject: RE: SC 1.3.3 - text alternative or no visible label?

 

  There is some debate at my work about whether (non-decorative) ‘graphical
symbols’ need to have visible labels when they provide instruction.

 

This question has been raised before.  If I recall correctly it was
determined at the time that the intention of the success criteria was not to
require text for icons but instead to address descriptions that relied on
sensory information such as bottom right, red button, etc.  From what I
understand at this time icons can be used to communicate information without
other visual text labels.  I understand this is problematic for some users
and I believe is something that is being discussed in the different task
forces for future WCAG updates.  In keeping with that discussion – yes, F26
might be more correctly placed under SC 1.1.1.  You may want to log an issue
https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues

 

Jonathan

 

Jonathan Avila

Chief Accessibility Officer

SSB BART Group 

jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com

703.637.8957 (Office)

 

From: Adam Cooper [mailto:cooperad@bigpond.com] 
Sent: Saturday, November 19, 2016 11:24 PM
To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
Subject: SC 1.3.3 - text alternative or no visible label?

 

hi all, 

 

There is some debate at my work about whether (non-decorative) ‘graphical
symbols’ need to have visible labels when they provide instruction.

 

So I have a question about SC1.3.3. 

 

Is it reasonable to infer from SC1.3.3 that instructions conveyed
non-verbally must be accompanied by some form of visible text?

 

For example, a button with a triangle icon indicating current state (or is
it indicating outcome?) that rotates 90 and toggles an expandable section.
The button includes offscreen text that says ‘show/hide xyz’.

 

Is this sufficient to meet SC  1.3.3?

 

Should anything be read into the use of ‘glyph’ and ‘symbol’ in failure
technique F26?

 

Should F26 be under SC1.1.1 instead?

 

cheers,

Adam 

 

 

 

 

This email has been scanned by BullGuard antivirus protection.

For more info visit www.bullguard.com
<http://www.bullguard.com/tracking.aspx?affiliate=bullguard&buyaffiliate=smt
p&url=/> 


This email has been scanned by BullGuard antivirus protection.
For more info visit www.bullguard.com
<http://www.bullguard.com/tracking.aspx?affiliate=bullguard&buyaffiliate=smt
p&url=/> 
Received on Tuesday, 22 November 2016 09:08:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 22 November 2016 09:08:28 UTC