E-mail List Archives
Re: WCAG Violation for use of tabindex=0 on staticelements.
From: Megginson, Jason
Date: Mar 17, 2016 8:17AM
- Next message: Snahendu Bhattacharya: "Re: WCAG Violation for use of tabindex=0 on static elements."
- Previous message: Snahendu Bhattacharya: "Re: WCAG Violation for use of tabindex=0 on static elements."
- Next message in Thread: Snahendu Bhattacharya: "Re: WCAG Violation for use of tabindex=0 on static elements."
- Previous message in Thread: Snahendu Bhattacharya: "Re: WCAG Violation for use of tabindex=0 on static elements."
- View all messages in this Thread
> Keyboard users can be of two types. 'Keyboard only' and 'screen reader + keyboard' users.
I make the argument for a third; low vision users of screen magnification. I agree that we should not force users to traverse through all the elements of the page unless those areas or elements need some user interaction. But I would also want to give the option to navigate or browse dynamic content (tooltips, dynamic regions etc) while retaining programmatic focus on the controlling element.
I am waiting for the day that screen magnification software utilize aria-controls (for example) where programmatic focus can be retained on a controlling element but allow the magnified screen to pan to the referenced dynamic region per the user's discretion. The trick, however, is informing sighted or low vision keyboard users that the controlling element references dynamic content in a non-obtrusive manner.
Jason Megginson Director, Accessibility Compliance Office (ACO)
The College Board
T 571.392.2195 | M 703.244.7755
<EMAIL REMOVED>
- Next message: Snahendu Bhattacharya: "Re: WCAG Violation for use of tabindex=0 on static elements."
- Previous message: Snahendu Bhattacharya: "Re: WCAG Violation for use of tabindex=0 on static elements."
- Next message in Thread: Snahendu Bhattacharya: "Re: WCAG Violation for use of tabindex=0 on static elements."
- Previous message in Thread: Snahendu Bhattacharya: "Re: WCAG Violation for use of tabindex=0 on static elements."
- View all messages in this Thread