E-mail List Archives
Re: WCAG SC 1.4.10 (Reflow) and intentionally hidden content
From: glen walker
Date: Sep 13, 2023 6:31PM
- Next message: glen walker: "Re: Question about search form label"
- Previous message: glen walker: "Re: Consistent Navigation when switching between layouts"
- Next message in Thread: Steve Green: "Re: WCAG SC 1.4.10 (Reflow) and intentionally hidden content"
- Previous message in Thread: Steve Green: "WCAG SC 1.4.10 (Reflow) and intentionally hidden content"
- View all messages in this Thread
It might depend on how nit-picky you want to get. Technically, 1.4.4
(which you didn't ask about) says zooming up to 200%. So anything between
100% and 200% is fair game. If something fails at exactly 173% but works
at all other percentages, then it fails 1.4.4. Now, how you'd stumble upon
that exact percentage without inspecting the CSS breakpoints, I don't know.
But 1.4.10 doesn't give you a range of percentages. It says if you lose
content at 400%, then it fails. It doesn't say "up to 400%". So if you lose
content between 200% and 399%, it technically doesn't fail 1.4.10.
Your example said 250%. That's beyond 1.4.4 so it doesn't apply, and it's
not exactly 400% so 1.4.10 doesn't apply. But I'm guessing the missing
breadcrumb items don't magically all appear at 400%? If the breadcrumb
items are removed at 250% and remain hidden up to 400%, then I'd fail it.
The guideline doesn't say whether the "loss of information" is intentional
or not.
- Next message: glen walker: "Re: Question about search form label"
- Previous message: glen walker: "Re: Consistent Navigation when switching between layouts"
- Next message in Thread: Steve Green: "Re: WCAG SC 1.4.10 (Reflow) and intentionally hidden content"
- Previous message in Thread: Steve Green: "WCAG SC 1.4.10 (Reflow) and intentionally hidden content"
- View all messages in this Thread