WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Query on heading hierarchy

for

From: glen walker
Date: Mar 20, 2018 10:58AM

I would guess that the majority of a11y sme's would prefer sequential
headings but it's not against wcag to not have them. I think that was the
main point.


On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 10:33 AM, Karlen Communications <
<EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:

> 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
> > > >
> > > at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
> >
> > > > >