WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: 4.1.1 Parsing > nested elements

for

From: Jonathan Avila
Date: Mar 29, 2018 8:56PM

> "elements are nested according to their specifications"

While ARIA isn't specifically called out by this SC and it's not a markup language I personally consider that when ARIA roles are applied to elements then descendant elements roles either explicit or implied should follow as well. For example, if you change an UL to role navigation then the you can't have dangling LI elements without a role like presentation or something else. In my example role navigation shouldn't be applied to UL it should be applied to a div above the UL.

Is this your opinion as well?

Jonathan

Jonathan Avila
Chief Accessibility Officer
Level Access
<EMAIL REMOVED>
703.637.8957 office

Visit us online:
Website | Twitter | Facebook | LinkedIn | Blog

See you at CSUN in March!

-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum < <EMAIL REMOVED> > On Behalf Of Steve Faulkner
Sent: Thursday, March 29, 2018 7:04 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] 4.1.1 Parsing > nested elements

The criterion itself is normative and states:
"elements are nested according to their specifications"
https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#ensure-compat-parses

If there is a nesting error found when conformance checking the HTML then from a strict reading it is a failure, it does not need an informative technique to state that.

But at the same time only a subset of nesting issues will cause accessibility problems, a <div> inside a <span>, for example, is not an issue that I consider a blocker.

--

Regards

SteveF
Current Standards Work @W3C
<http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/2015/03/current-standards-work-at-w3c/>;

On 29 March 2018 at 11:45, Fernand van Olphen < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
wrote:

> Hi Steve,
>
> I agree with you that it is a PITA. But I feel that there is a subtle
> difference between guidance and instruction.
>
> I have to have some ammo if I am auditing a website and in my report I
> state that SC 4.1.1 is not met because there are incorrect nested elements.
>
> What if the developer is wcag-savvy, reads my report and slaps me back
> in my face, saying: :
> Incorrect nested elements? According to the Sufficient Technique
> number 4 I do not have to nest elements correctly, because I can pass
> the SC by a combination of H74, H93 and H94. So, to hell with your
> incorrect nested elements!
>
> What am I to say to him ? (Besides: you are fired!!!)
>
> Fernand
>
> De disclaimer van toepassing op e-mail van de gemeente Den Haag vindt
> u
> op: http://www.denhaag.nl/disclaimer
> > > archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
> >