- From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
- Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2021 09:04:06 +0000
- To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
On 23/11/2021 07:18, bryan rasmussen wrote: > >"the visual > presentation doesn't convey the actual programmatic structure underneath") > > in a lot of scenarios that makes better sense as a description of the > problem, if people are using buttons correctly, not as links etc. then > the markup structure is correctly matched to functionality, but if the > design then mandates those buttons look like not-buttons then it seems > reasonable to argue that it is the design that is wrong. But my point is: this thinking is in effect the opposite of what 1.3.1 Info and Relationships normatively mandates, so in my estimation you can't fail those situations under 1.3.1. And if we're thinking that this needs changing (either 1.3.1 itself, or a new success criterion for this opposite scenario), then we get into a very subjective area of trying to normatively define at what point a visual styling of something is not appropriate enough for what it is, which is exceedingly difficult/impossible to do in an unambiguous pass/fail way (unless we want to have AGWG decide on an official "design guide of what styles are and aren't illegal to use". 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 Tuesday, 23 November 2021 09:04:20 UTC