WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Error prevention

for

From: Mallory
Date: Apr 30, 2018 5:28AM

I would think this falls under Testing. This isn't students' personal data (PI) is it? It's test questions? And it's not them doing banking or agreeing to contracts or the such? So I suspect you fall under a different WCAG guideline with notes on "testing". Tests have some special considerations with timing, error prevention etc because of the fact that they are school or certification tests.

cheers,
_mallory

On Mon, Apr 30, 2018, at 1:18 PM, JP Jamous wrote:
> Hi Lynn,
>
> I am having a hard time understanding your question. Can you give us an example?
>
> Based on what I was able to follow, you should not be combining students
> if each has a different types of questions. You would need a consistent
> logic that should work across any test. As you add students and
> different tests to the mix, you are complicating your life and the
> project.
>
> Secondly, I am not sure how this success criteria would apply to your
> situation. That was why I needed more clarifications.
>
>
>
> --------------------
> JP Jamous
> Senior Digital Accessibility Engineer
> E-Mail Me |Join My LinkedIn Network
> --------------------
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: WebAIM-Forum < <EMAIL REMOVED> > On Behalf Of
> Isabel Holdsworth
> Sent: Monday, April 30, 2018 6:13 AM
> To: <EMAIL REMOVED>
> Subject: [WebAIM] Error prevention
>
> Hi guys,
>
> I have a bit of an anomaly here, which I'm sure some of you will have
> come across in the past.
>
> WCAG2 success criterion 3.3.4 Error Prevention (Legal, Financial,
> Data) requires checking, confirmation or reversal of data in order to pass.
>
> We are dealing with test questions that get easier or more difficult
> depending on each successive answer. So two students giving different
> answers to question 1 could be given to almost totally different tests.
>
> If we were to offer a review screen, and the user changed their answer
> to a question early in the test, this would likely invalidate the rest
> of the test.
>
> Would it be enough in this instance to offer decent client-side form
> validation, given that the tests are delivered on devices that
> definitely have JavaScript enabled?
>
> Cheers, Lynn
> > > at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
> >
> > > >