WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Query on heading hierarchy

for

From: Karlen Communications
Date: Mar 20, 2018 10:33AM

First a disclaimer: I support sequential headings. I "preach" sequential headings!

To the argument and the example given of following the visual representation of structure using headings that appear to be out of sequence. I've seen document authors choose a heading style/formatting because of the way it looks, not because it represents any type of structure. I've remediated documents in PDF and then received the Word document and what appeared visually as a smaller font or lower heading level was really a modified H2 with a smaller font than the H3, not a visual H3 which had a larger font than the H2. I've also remediated Word and PDF documents where all headings were the same size but had different attributes such as bold, italic and underline...sometimes all three.

As document authors we have to use sequential headings whenever possible and as document remediators we are tasked with providing a "logical reading order" or "logical structure to the document."

If we abdicate logical document structure/logical reading order, then we can just accept whatever heading Tags are produced in PDF and whatever headings are used in source applications. While this cuts down on the remediation time, it does not improve the accessibility of the content.

Taking this further, if we accept whatever headings are used in the document as the "right of the document author" then we should also be accepting any other structures as being the right of the author which again reduces remediation time to just looking for missing Alt Text...until we can make all images Artifacts in all applications.

There is a trend to winnow the accessibility of documents to its bare minimum. Not sure what is driving this trend but for me, this is a step backward not forward.

Part of accessible document design is "design." Part of our role as accessible document remediation professionals is to ensure a logical reading order/logical structure to digital content.

I would really like my role as an accessible document remediator to be obsolete because we've provided the training/education to document authors and we have the tools we need, not that we simply accept whatever is presented to us as "garbage in/garbage out."

Cheers, Karen


-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum < <EMAIL REMOVED> > On Behalf Of glen walker
Sent: Tuesday, March 20, 2018 10:29 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Query on heading hierarchy

+1 to Birkir. The purpose of the guideline is to make sure the semantic
heading levels match the visual presentation. It doesn't say it has to be
h1 followed by h2 followed by h3. While that's certainly ideal, there are lots of situations where it makes sense to skip a level.

On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 2:39 AM, Birkir R. Gunnarsson < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:

> All that WCAG 1.3.1 requires is that semantic information mirrors
> visual information.
> If you have a largest heading followed by a small heading followed by
> a heading that looks somewhere in the middle, marking the first as h1,
> and the others as h2 is misleading, it does not reflect their visual
> weight, but marking the first has h1, then h3 and h2 would reflect
> their visual emphasis and comply with WCAG 1.3.1.
>
> So the first step is to make sure the heading levels mirror the visual
> weight of the headings on the page.
> An ideal step would be to ensure that both visual weight and heading
> level correctly describes the content structure, but my reading of
> WCAG 1.3.1 does not show me that this is required.
> Maybe my view goes against the popular view, but I think there are
> plenty of situations where an h1 can be followed by an h3 and then h2.
>
> WE often have content with a main heading, a small subsection or note
> with no descendants and then categories.
> Think of a page of bank accounts.
> The main heading is "your accounts".
> It could be followed by a small section such as "quick overview" or
> "your transactions in the last 24 hours".
>
> Then you have headings for credit card accounts, checking accounts and
> other accounts, inside those you have headings for individual accounts
> within those categories.
>
> I think the structure that best describes this is to have the heading
> of the small section an h3 or h4, the heading of account categories as
> h2s and headings for individual accounts h3s.
> The section at the top does not have its own subsection, and it takes
> up a small area of the page. I think marking it as an h2 does not
> describe the way the page is structured.
>
>
>
>
> On 3/20/18, Osmo Saarikumpu < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
> > On 20/03/2018 09:01, Vemaarapu Venkatesh wrote:
> >> Can we say that the heading hierarchy is maintained if h1 is
> >> followed by h3's directly skipping h2's. Will this comply with WCAG 2.0.
> >
> > At least I can't think of a situation where a h3 would be justified
> > without a preceding h2. See e.g.:
> >
> > https://webaim.org/techniques/semanticstructure/#contentstructure
> >
> > --
> > Best wishes, Osmo
> > > > > > archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
> > > >
>
>
> --
> Work hard. Have fun. Make history.
> > > archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
> >