WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Conforming alternate version

for

From:
Date: Jan 14, 2022 3:52AM

Thank you,

I understand, that this is not a good strategy, but this is acceptable
at all? Basically, the site  is not usable for the users  not using or
not perceiving the accessible version.

Zsolt

2022. 01. 13. 15:04 keltezéssel, L Snider írta:
> Hi Zsolt,
>
> I also had a flashback to 2003 with the alternate accessible site. I would
> highly recommend not doing this for a number of reasons. We should be able
> to make one site fairly accessible for many people. We can never make one
> site accessible for 100% of users, because each one of us has different
> needs. Technology changes every year, and sometimes in months-Look at voice
> control, and how it has improved hugely in just 4 years and now it is a
> major tech to check with...
>
> Having two sites 'others' those of us with disabilities, and in 2022 this
> would not be a strategy I recommend. For me, this is similar to overlays,
> and I won't get into that rat's nest but if you aren't aware of that, do go
> on Twitter and search overlays accessibility.
>
> Plus, in my personal view, it opens you up to a lawsuit. It may not apply
> to the country you reside in, but it is an important successful lawsuit in
> my view:
> https://www.levelaccess.com/settlement-shows-limits-separate-equal-approach-digital-accessibility/
>
> Cheers
>
> L:sa
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 4:57 AM Zsolt Edelényi < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>
>> Thank you Mark and Glen for your answer!
>>
>> Zsolt
>>
>> 2022. 01. 12. 16:44 keltezéssel, glen walker írta:
>>> The "Conforming Alternate Version" is spelled out pretty well at the link
>>> you mentioned:
>>>
>>> https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#dfn-conforming-alternate-version
>>>
>>> In this case, it looks like non-conforming version (the main website?)
>> has
>>> a link to the conforming version via the image link (the first link on
>> the
>>> page) that looks like a yellow circle with three embedded black circles.
>>> The image has appropriate alt text leading the user to the "barrier free"
>>> version.
>>>
>>> However, both the link and the image are tab stops. The link does not
>> have
>>> a focus indicator but the image does, so technically the link would fail
>>> the "accessibility-supported mechanism" requirement in #4.1 because it
>>> doesn't have a focus indicator. But that's easy to fix. There's no need
>>> to have tabindex=0 on the image since it's contained in the link and if
>> the
>>> focus indicator is fixed, it would satisfy a "conforming alternate
>> version"
>>> (assuming the website it's linked to is actually conforming and provides
>>> all the same information as the original site and is kept up to date).
>>>
>>> Personally, I think it's a lot more work to maintain two websites and
>> make
>>> sure they stay in sync when changes are made rather than the work
>> required
>>> to make the original website conformant.
>>> >>> >>> >>> >> --
>> Zsolt Edelényi
>> Web Accessibility Specialist
>> Mobile: +36205617144
>> email: <EMAIL REMOVED>
>>
>> >> >> >> >>
> > > > --
Zsolt Edelényi
Web Accessibility Specialist
Mobile: +36205617144
email: <EMAIL REMOVED>