E-mail List Archives

You are here: Home > Community > E-mail List Archives > View Thread

Thread: Tiny clickable element: does this fail WCAG2?

Number of posts in this thread: 10 (In chronological order)

From: Lynn Holdsworth
Date: Mon, Jul 20 2015 10:20AM
Subject: Tiny clickable element: does this fail WCAG2?
No previous message | Next message →

Hi all,

Sorry - another WCAG2 question for you:

I'm auditing a carousel/slideshow that has those little dots for
choosing a slide. The dots are quite small, around 5px across. I'm
concerned that a user with poor vision or unsteady hands may find it
difficult to home in on these dots to click them. Since there's no
Previous/Next buttons, and the slideshow doesn't play automatically,
this is the only way to move between slides.

Does this fail WCAG2? I really hope so, but I can't find a place to fail it.

Thanks again, Lynn

From: deborah.kaplan
Date: Mon, Jul 20 2015 10:25AM
Subject: Re: Tiny clickable element: does this fail WCAG2?
← Previous message | Next message →

Well, it's a bad idea for the business.

http://shouldiuseacarousel.com/

(Thanks, Jared.)

Are those small buttons accessible by the keyboard? If not, it fails
WCAG. Do they enlarge when the page is assumed? If not, failure.

But as Jared said about the previous question, no matter what, it's
probably usability and accessibility failure. Carousels don't work. If
the people in charge of the site want users to find the contentthat
appears later in the carousel, the answer is, they probably won't.

Deborah Kaplan

On Mon, 20 Jul 2015, Lynn Holdsworth wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> Sorry - another WCAG2 question for you:
>
> I'm auditing a carousel/slideshow that has those little dots for
> choosing a slide. The dots are quite small, around 5px across. I'm
> concerned that a user with poor vision or unsteady hands may find it
> difficult to home in on these dots to click them. Since there's no
> Previous/Next buttons, and the slideshow doesn't play automatically,
> this is the only way to move between slides.
>
> Does this fail WCAG2? I really hope so, but I can't find a place to fail it.
>
> Thanks again, Lynn
> > > > --

From: deborah.kaplan
Date: Mon, Jul 20 2015 10:29AM
Subject: Re: Tiny clickable element: does this fail WCAG2?
← Previous message | Next message →

On Mon, 20 Jul 2015, = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = wrote:
> Do they enlarge when the page is assumed? If not, failure.

Ugh, Dragon, why do you have to be like that? Sorry, that should read
"do they enlarge when the page is zoomed." I apologize; usually I am
more careful about proofreading.

Deborah Kaplan

From: Lynn Holdsworth
Date: Mon, Jul 20 2015 10:31AM
Subject: Re: Tiny clickable element: does this fail WCAG2?
← Previous message | Next message →

Hi Deborah,

This could be viewed as usability, except it would affect people with
poor vision or unsteady hands more than your average bear.

But I'm not sure where to fail it.

I don't know anybody who likes carousels :-)

KR, Lynn

On 20/07/2015, = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> Well, it's a bad idea for the business.
>
> http://shouldiuseacarousel.com/
>
> (Thanks, Jared.)
>
> Are those small buttons accessible by the keyboard? If not, it fails
> WCAG. Do they enlarge when the page is assumed? If not, failure.
>
> But as Jared said about the previous question, no matter what, it's
> probably usability and accessibility failure. Carousels don't work. If
> the people in charge of the site want users to find the contentthat
> appears later in the carousel, the answer is, they probably won't.
>
> Deborah Kaplan
>
> On Mon, 20 Jul 2015, Lynn Holdsworth wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Sorry - another WCAG2 question for you:
>>
>> I'm auditing a carousel/slideshow that has those little dots for
>> choosing a slide. The dots are quite small, around 5px across. I'm
>> concerned that a user with poor vision or unsteady hands may find it
>> difficult to home in on these dots to click them. Since there's no
>> Previous/Next buttons, and the slideshow doesn't play automatically,
>> this is the only way to move between slides.
>>
>> Does this fail WCAG2? I really hope so, but I can't find a place to fail
>> it.
>>
>> Thanks again, Lynn
>> >> >> >> >
> --
> > > > >

From: Chagnon | PubCom
Date: Mon, Jul 20 2015 10:37AM
Subject: Re: Tiny clickable element: does this fail WCAG2?
← Previous message | Next message →

Coincidentally, Jakob Nielsen's group published today an article about some common UX features in iOS that impair usability. One of those design items was the use of dots to represent different pages, or in your case, different views in the carousel.

Although they focus on usability, a close cousin of accessibility, the article is worth reading:
http://www.nngroup.com/articles/4-ios-rules-break/

--Bevi Chagnon

From: Lynn Holdsworth
Date: Mon, Jul 20 2015 10:51AM
Subject: Re: Tiny clickable element: does this fail WCAG2?
← Previous message | Next message →

Hi Bevi,

I'll give this a read. Thanks for flagging it up.

KR, Lyn

On 20/07/2015, Chagnon | PubCom < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> Coincidentally, Jakob Nielsen's group published today an article about some
> common UX features in iOS that impair usability. One of those design items
> was the use of dots to represent different pages, or in your case, different
> views in the carousel.
>
> Although they focus on usability, a close cousin of accessibility, the
> article is worth reading:
> http://www.nngroup.com/articles/4-ios-rules-break/
>
> --Bevi Chagnon
>
>

From: chaals
Date: Mon, Jul 20 2015 5:03PM
Subject: Re: Tiny clickable element: does this fail WCAG2?
← Previous message | Next message →

- lynn.holdsworth@

Hi all,

20.07.2015, 18:31, "Lynn Holdsworth" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >:
> Hi Deborah,
>
> This could be viewed as usability, except it would affect people with
> poor vision or unsteady hands more than your average bear.

If the things you have to identify are not readily visually identifiable, it might fail under requirements for contrast. I think there is a bug here in WCAG that should be fixed, requiring controls to be operable.

Many carousels also technically fail on timing requirements.

> But I'm not sure where to fail it.
>
> I don't know anybody who likes carousels :-)

I don't hate them as much as most people. Although I wish we had the tabpanels spec implemented, and people could easily reset the presentation to be a well-behaved panelset under simple user control :)

cheers

--
Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = - - - Find more at http://yandex.com

From: Subhash Chhetri
Date: Wed, Jul 22 2015 12:19AM
Subject: Re: Tiny clickable element: does this fail WCAG2?
← Previous message | Next message →

I guess there are two possible problems in it. Since you are saying dots are too small that might be difficult for person with poor vision to access, maybe color contrast issue is also there. In this sense, WCAG 1.4.3 fit in it.

Another issue would be related to keyboard accessibility. Since dots are only means to move slide, is it tab focusable? If not so, WCAG 2.1.1 is enough to address the same.

Best Regards,
Subhash Chhetri

--------------------------------------------
On Tue, 21/7/15, = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:

Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Tiny clickable element: does this fail WCAG2?
To: "WebAIM Discussion List" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Date: Tuesday, 21 July, 2015, 4:33 AM

- lynn.holdsworth@

Hi all,

20.07.2015, 18:31, "Lynn Holdsworth"
< = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >:
> Hi Deborah,
>
> This could be viewed as usability, except
it would affect people with
> poor vision
or unsteady hands more than your average bear.

If the things you have to
identify are not readily visually identifiable, it might
fail under requirements for contrast. I think there is a bug
here in WCAG that should be fixed, requiring controls to be
operable.

Many carousels
also technically fail on timing requirements.

> But I'm not sure
where to fail it.
>
>
I don't know anybody who likes carousels :-)

I don't hate them as much
as most people. Although I wish we had the tabpanels spec
implemented, and people could easily reset the presentation
to be a well-behaved panelset under simple user control
:)

cheers

--
Charles
McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
- - - Find more at http://yandex.com

From: Subhash Chhetri
Date: Wed, Jul 22 2015 12:21AM
Subject: Re: Tiny clickable element: does this fail WCAG2?
← Previous message | Next message →

From: Lynn Holdsworth
Date: Fri, Jul 24 2015 4:44AM
Subject: Re: Tiny clickable element: does this fail WCAG2?
← Previous message | No next message

Thanks everyone - much appreciated as always.

On 22/07/2015, Subhash Chhetri < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> I guess there are two possible problems in it. Since you are saying dots are
> too small that might be difficult for person with poor vision to access,
> maybe color contrast issue is also there. In this sense, WCAG 1.4.3 fit in
> it.
>
> Another issue would be related to keyboard accessibility. Since dots are
> only means to move slide, is it tab focusable? If not so, WCAG 2.1.1 is
> enough to address the same.
>
> Best Regards,
> Subhash Chhetri
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Tue, 21/7/15, = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Tiny clickable element: does this fail WCAG2?
> To: "WebAIM Discussion List" < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> Date: Tuesday, 21 July, 2015, 4:33 AM
>
> - lynn.holdsworth@
>
> Hi all,
>
> 20.07.2015, 18:31, "Lynn Holdsworth"
> < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >:
> > Hi Deborah,
> >
> > This could be viewed as usability, except
> it would affect people with
> > poor vision
> or unsteady hands more than your average bear.
>
> If the things you have to
> identify are not readily visually identifiable, it might
> fail under requirements for contrast. I think there is a bug
> here in WCAG that should be fixed, requiring controls to be
> operable.
>
> Many carousels
> also technically fail on timing requirements.
>
> > But I'm not sure
> where to fail it.
> >
> >
> I don't know anybody who likes carousels :-)
>
> I don't hate them as much
> as most people. Although I wish we had the tabpanels spec
> implemented, and people could easily reset the presentation
> to be a well-behaved panelset under simple user control
> :)
>
> cheers
>
> --
> Charles
> McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
> - - - Find more at http://yandex.com
> > > > >
> > > > >