WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Does SC1.3.1 require landmarks?

for

From: wolfgang.berndorfer
Date: Oct 12, 2020 12:03PM

Seems, the discussion on GitHub in 2017 was near to include a
failure/technique for landmarks... Or some hoped that WCAG 2.1 would include
a new SC for them.

And some arguments against it seem strange to me.

"we cannot retroactively introduce conditions that invalidates content that
previously met the SC conformance ."
I thought, the SC were open for future technologies and techniques.

"The reason we were given for not including this failure in WCAG 2.0 was
that it would make legacy content fail (2008 and before). [.] it is intended
to apply to WCAG 2.1 to new sites that want to meet the new standard."

Anyway. There is no place for landmarks in the ontology of the WCAG 2.1
either, as it seems. But everyone regards them as best practice.

Only the WebAIM checklist for 1.3.1 places landmarks beside headings and
lists:
https://webaim.org/standards/wcag/checklist#sc1.3.1

So, what should I do? Check or not? Recommend only as best practice?

Wolfgang