WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

To what degree does failure to convey structure violate 1.3.1 or other success criteria?

for

From: Robert Fentress
Date: Feb 6, 2018 7:19AM

To what degree is conveying information and relationships a required thing
under WCAG Success Criteria (SC) 1.3.1 Info and Relationships
<https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/quickref/#qr-content-structure-separation-programmatic>
?

As a reminder, that SC reads, "Information, structure, and relationships
conveyed through presentation can be programmatically determined or are
available in text."

A strict reading of the text of 1.3.1 seems to indicate that the issue is
not *whether* information and relationships are conveyed, but rather that
any information and relationships that are *conveyed through presentation*
are also conveyed semantically or with text. An example of something that
you might think violates 1.3.1 but that, if you just look at the plain
words in the SC, is *not* wrong is when the <address> tag is used to mark
up any old address, when, semantically, it should only used to define the
contact information for the author/owner of a document. So, the tag is
used incorrectly there, but there is nothing in the presentation that
suggests this. Would this violate 1.3.1?

Similarly, I have always thought that using asterisk characters to denote
bulleted lists violated 1.3.1, but, since the info and relationships are
"available in text" through the use of the asterisk character, one could
argue SC 1.3.1 is not violated.

Another possible candidate that might catch this sort of thing is SC 2.4.6
Headings and Labels
<https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/quickref/#qr-navigation-mechanisms-descriptive>,
which reads, "Headings and labels describe topic or purpose." Would
information about the type of element that is being exposed count as a
"label" under this success criteria? Reading the Understanding 2.4.6 page
<http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/navigation-mechanisms-descriptive.html>;
makes
clear they are not only referring to the <label> HTML element, but I find
it a little squishy, based on the wording there and the rather anemic
techniques listing, what *exactly* that term entails.

Finally, it is possible that SC 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value
<http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/ensure-compat-rsv.html>; might be
violated by this sort of thing, since it requires that the name and role be
programmatically determined. However, this only applies to user interface
components, which lists and addresses are not.

Another note: If we *do* decide to interpret SC 1.3.1 or SC 2.4.6 more
liberally to include incorrect or inadequate semantic encoding, where do we
draw the line in terms of marking something as technically violating a
criterion? Does a failure to use definition lists, where appropriate, or
using unordered lists instead, count as a violation? How about <dfn> or
<cite>? Where do we draw the line?

If you've gotten this far, you obviously have too much time on your hands
and should get back to work (winky face)! But, seriously, I'd appreciate
the community's thoughts on the matter. I feel like I might be missing
something obvious.

Best,
Rob

--
Rob Fentress
Senior Accessibility Solutions Designer
Assistive Technologies at Virginia Tech
Electronic Business Card (vCard)
<http://search.vt.edu/search/person.vcf?person54847>
LinkedIn Profile
<https://www.linkedin.com/in/rob-fentress-aa0b609?trk=profile-badge>