1.11.1, 2.5.3 and 2.5.5

I had the criteria correct.  I'm just confused about some things.  To
me the issue of adopting Jan's language for 2.5.3 should be settled.
It is an improvement.

Bread Crumbs and Associations
1.11.1 Access Relationships:

The user can access explicitly-defined relationships based on the
user's position in content (e.g. show form control's label, show
label's form control, show a cell's table headers). (Level A)
2.5.3 Location in Hierarchy

The user can view the path of nodes leading from the root of any
content hierarchy in which the structure and semantics are implied by
presentation, as opposed to an explicit logical structure with defined
semantics (such as the HTML5 Canvas Element), or as a consequence of
decentralized-extensibility (such as the HTML5 item / itemprop
microdata elements), and only if the user agent keeps an internal
model of the hierarchy that it does not expose via the [DOM] or some
other accessibility mechanism. (Level A) .
Jan Richards Substitute 2.5.3

The user can view the path of nodes leading from the root to the
current focussed element.
 2.5.5 Access to Relationships which Aid Navigation:

The user can access explicitly-defined relationships based on the
user's position in content, and the path of nodes leading from the
root of any content hierarchy to that position. (Level AA)
Ambiguities:
What is the difference between 1.11.1 and 2.5.5.  Also, what does "the
root of any content hierarchy to that position" mean?

Issues:

2.5.3 Use the language of Jan Richards

Should be 1.11.1 be in 2.5

Should these structures should be navigable?

Received on Friday, 13 January 2012 09:31:44 UTC