Re: Information and relationships

Hi,

I haven’t seen your site, so I can only guess:

First of all - WCAG allows many disadvantages for sighted users. It’s completely okay to put information into an alt attribute that cannot be accessed only with AT or plugins.

I think the reason is simple, because normally websites are made for sighted users and they usually don’t miss anything. That’s why doesn’t care about this so much.

But in your case I’m not sure, if there is nu visual hint that allows to understand, where there is h1 and where it is h2 - maybe h2 is in a box or somewhere else, where it’s clear for sighted users, that this part of the page should be part of something bigger. So the relationship between the headings might be intuitively or subconsciously understood by sighted users.

If not: maybe you should rethink the headings concept…

Marc

Am 20.12.2023 um 13:09 schrieb Ms J <ms.jflz.woop@gmail.com>:

Hello

I just had an interesting accessibility discussion on 1.3.1 and wondered if it was possible to gain some insight please.

I have two headings styled the same, but semantically they are marked-up as h1 and h2. The headings should be styled to match the semantics: in this case the semantics are correct, it is the styling that is wrong.

My understanding is that this does not fail 1.3.1. However, the argument was that the information conveyed through presentation (although, in this case, be it incorrect information) is not programmatically determined so it still fails and that the solution is to style the h1 differently.

I can see the argument in that the sc doesn't say 'the semantics are correctly determined' but 'the semantics as conveyed through the visual presentation are correctly determined'. Therefore, there is an argument to say the styling and semantics must align in for this sc to stand, and it is the misalignment that fails, and therefore, the change should be made to either the semantics OR the styling.

It seems a bit like reverse engineering the sc to make the argument that the styling should therefore follow the semantics. But I do see the argument that it's not one following the other, but considering them both in tandem and ensuring they align...

What is the general approach in this case please?

Thanks

Sarah

Sent from Outlook for iOS<https://aka.ms/o0ukef>