- From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
- Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 18:43:54 +0100
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
On 24/07/2020 17:36, Mike Cleary wrote: > But I also > didn’t know that expand/collapse widgets that don’t have the role of > “button” or “link” are WCAG non-conformances. Yes, for this part, interactive widgets (that are not just static text) need to programmatically convey their role. https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#name-role-value > Some here take a hard line on > “button button” because it was found as part of 508 testing, and 508 > compliance is a contractual obligation, so that’s that. I disagree about > that, but I don’t really have the authority when it comes to > accessibility; they do. This, however, is the part where I think most of us here disagree on their take. It is *not* an actual failure of WCAG, I'd say. So not a failure in light of 508 either. They're going beyond what the standard says and saying it fails the standard...but yeh, if there's no actual conversation to be had with them about it, then you're probably stuck with following their (misguided) interpretation. P -- Patrick H. Lauke https://www.splintered.co.uk/ | https://github.com/patrickhlauke https://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | https://www.deviantart.com/redux twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
Received on Friday, 24 July 2020 17:44:09 UTC