- From: Urban, Mark (CDC/OCOO/OCIO/CEO) <fka2@cdc.gov>
- Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2021 14:31:31 +0000
- To: "Patrick H. Lauke" <redux@splintered.co.uk>, "w3c-wai-ig@w3.org" <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
Hi all, I agree and disagree with my very esteemed colleague Patrick here: AGREE: Yes, we spend too much time on this issue. DISAGREE: because we never just bite the bullet and make a call as to what's the best practice way to do this. Style does matter, in this instance especially to persons using screen mags and heavy keyboard/voice input. When you make something look like something it isn't, people get confused on functionality ad purpose. Or, put another way, slapping a Subaru logo on my daughter's sedan doesn't suddenly give it 4-wheel drive. Regards, Mark D. Urban CDC/ATSDR Accessibility Program Manager Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) Office of the Chief Operating Officer (OCOO) Murban@CDC.gov | 919-541-0562 office -----Original Message----- From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk> Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2021 7:36 PM To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org Subject: Re: Buttons styled as links and links styled as buttons My personal take on this is that it's a "talismanic" issue that is really a non-issue, but for some reason seems to constantly suck up all the energy and effort, as if it was the most pressing aspect to solve in the accessibility discourse. I'm a proponent of the role ideally matching the function (and if not, failing der 4.1.2), but leaving 1.3.1 well out of this as there really is far too much of a gray area between how a link or button "traditionally" looks and what the reality is (with call-to-action links, download links, graphical links, etc) and voice users can generally easily activate a control by saying "click [visible text]" without even needing to specify link or button... P
Received on Friday, 19 November 2021 14:31:46 UTC