WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: evaluating accessibility with WCAG 2.0

for

From: Jason Kiss
Date: Apr 7, 2011 1:21AM

Whether or not it's a full-on violation is, like many things to do with
semantic markup, open to interpretation. But should one want to take a
strict approach, I could see calling it a failure of WCAG 2.0 SC 1.3.1
since the content is fairly clearly, I would argue, a list of links, and
so should be marked up as a list, as you describe.

Making it a list would also provide assistive technology users with
information about the number of links in the list. Such an approach is
supported by Sufficient Technique H48: Using ol, ul and dl for lists or
groups of links (http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20101014/H48).

Cheers,

Jason
--
Jason Kiss
Web: www.accessibleculture.org
Email: <EMAIL REMOVED>
Twitter: @jkiss

On 07/04/11 05:37, Andrew Kirkpatrick wrote:
> I don't think that this violates any WCAG 2.0/1.0/508 criteria.
> There may be usability advantages for another method, but no
> violation.
>
> Thanks, AWK
>
> Andrew Kirkpatrick Group Product Manager, Accessibility Adobe
> Systems
>
> <EMAIL REMOVED> http://twitter.com/awkawk
> http://blogs.adobe.com/accessibility
>
>
> -----Original Message----- From: <EMAIL REMOVED>
> [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Angela
> French Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2011 1:33 PM To: 'WebAim Forum
> ( <EMAIL REMOVED> )'; ' <EMAIL REMOVED> '
> Subject: [WebAIM] evaluating accessibility with WCAG 2.0
>
> I am doing my first accessibility review of a site specifically using
> WCAG 2.0 and I'm having some trouble making the mental cross-walk
> from 1.0 to 2.0. In particular, I am struggling with how to present
> results to management in a way that is easily understood in terms of
> what "rule" is being broken and the severity of that "rule."
>
> Here is a specific example I'm struggling with. A content developer
> did not use the proper html element to convey proper structure.
> Where, in my opinion, an unordered list should have been used to
> present a list of links, the content provider wrote the links in a
> paragraph tag with the pipe mark between links like this:
>
> <p>< a href="">link one</a> |<a href="">link two</a> | etc.</p>.
>
> This is semantically incorrect, but what Principle/Guideline/Success
> Criterion/etc. does it violate? It does not follow General
> Technique
> 115<http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20081103/general.html#G115>;.
>
>
So is it Principle 1 that is not being conformed to? Guideline 1.3.1
(which is level A)? General Technique 115?
> What is the best practice method of communicating the failure
> presented in this example?
>
> Thank you for any advice.
>
> Angela French Internet Specialist State Board for Community and
> Technical Colleges 360-704-4316 <EMAIL REMOVED>
> http://www.checkoutacollege.com<;http://www.checkoutacollege.com/>;
>
>