E-mail List Archives

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

Thread: What success criteria does empty headings violate?

Number of posts in this thread: 4 (In chronological order)

From: Robert Fentress
Date: Tue, Jan 30 2018 7:14AM
Subject: What success criteria does empty headings violate?
No previous message | Next message →

If you have an empty heading tag, which, if any, WCAG success criteria do
you feel this violates? I think it should be viewed as violating WCAG SC
2.4.6 Headings and Labels
<https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/navigation-mechanisms-descriptive.html>
(as
does WAVE), since an empty heading cannot describe any "topic or
purpose" but it is, nonetheless, semantically, a heading. Some other very
knowledgable people disagree, considering this to be merely a violation of
best practice. Others may also think it violates WCAG SC 1.3.1 Information
and Relationships
<https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/content-structure-separation-programmatic.html>
(such
as WAVE, HTML Code_Sniffer and SiteImprove), and even WCAG SC 2.4.1 Bypass
Blocks
<https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/navigation-mechanisms-skip.html>
(such
as WAVE), but those are probably more of stretch, in my opinion. What do
you think?

--
Rob Fentress
Senior Accessibility Solutions Designer
Assistive Technologies at Virginia Tech
Electronic Business Card (vCard)
<http://search.vt.edu/search/person.vcf?person54847>
LinkedIn Profile
<https://www.linkedin.com/in/rob-fentress-aa0b609?trk=profile-badge>

From: Birkir R. Gunnarsson
Date: Tue, Jan 30 2018 7:20AM
Subject: Re: What success criteria does empty headings violate?
← Previous message | Next message →

It could be argued that it violates WCAG 2.4.6 .. the text of an empty
heading is mst certainly not descriptive of topic or purpose.

It's usually not a major inconvenience to users, most assistive
technologies ignore emty headings, so I have filed it as a low
priority issue under WCAG 2.4.6.

On 1/30/18, Robert Fentress < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> If you have an empty heading tag, which, if any, WCAG success criteria do
> you feel this violates? I think it should be viewed as violating WCAG SC
> 2.4.6 Headings and Labels
> <https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/navigation-mechanisms-descriptive.html>
> (as
> does WAVE), since an empty heading cannot describe any "topic or
> purpose" but it is, nonetheless, semantically, a heading. Some other very
> knowledgable people disagree, considering this to be merely a violation of
> best practice. Others may also think it violates WCAG SC 1.3.1 Information
> and Relationships
> <https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/content-structure-separation-programmatic.html>
> (such
> as WAVE, HTML Code_Sniffer and SiteImprove), and even WCAG SC 2.4.1 Bypass
> Blocks
> <https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/navigation-mechanisms-skip.html>
> (such
> as WAVE), but those are probably more of stretch, in my opinion. What do
> you think?
>
> --
> Rob Fentress
> Senior Accessibility Solutions Designer
> Assistive Technologies at Virginia Tech
> Electronic Business Card (vCard)
> <http://search.vt.edu/search/person.vcf?person54847>
> LinkedIn Profile
> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rob-fentress-aa0b609?trk=profile-badge>
> > > > >

--
Work hard. Have fun. Make history.

From: Patrick H. Lauke
Date: Tue, Jan 30 2018 7:21AM
Subject: Re: What success criteria does empty headings violate?
← Previous message | Next message →

On 30/01/2018 14:14, Robert Fentress wrote:
> If you have an empty heading tag, which, if any, WCAG success criteria do
> you feel this violates? I think it should be viewed as violating WCAG SC
> 2.4.6 Headings and Labels
> <https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/navigation-mechanisms-descriptive.html>
> (as
> does WAVE), since an empty heading cannot describe any "topic or
> purpose" but it is, nonetheless, semantically, a heading. Some other very
> knowledgable people disagree, considering this to be merely a violation of
> best practice. Others may also think it violates WCAG SC 1.3.1 Information
> and Relationships
> <https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/content-structure-separation-programmatic.html>
> (such
> as WAVE, HTML Code_Sniffer and SiteImprove), and even WCAG SC 2.4.1 Bypass
> Blocks
> <https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/navigation-mechanisms-skip.html>
> (such
> as WAVE), but those are probably more of stretch, in my opinion. What do
> you think?

I've been known to mark these sorts of things as failure just under
1.3.1. I can see the interpretation that this could also fall under
2.4.6 (though I generally "look" at the page for anything that acts as a
visible heading/label, and then determine if that is appropriately
descriptive - but thinking more deeply, you've got a point). I'd say
marking BOTH 1.3.1 and 2.4.6 as fails in this case is appropriate.

P
--
Patrick H. Lauke

www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com
twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke

From: Robert Fentress
Date: Tue, Jan 30 2018 8:57AM
Subject: Re: What success criteria does empty headings violate?
← Previous message | No next message

ComplianceSheriff also flags it as a warning under 2.4.6, so that is
another piece of evidence.

On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 9:21 AM, Patrick H. Lauke < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
wrote:

> On 30/01/2018 14:14, Robert Fentress wrote:
>
>> If you have an empty heading tag, which, if any, WCAG success criteria do
>> you feel this violates? I think it should be viewed as violating WCAG SC
>> 2.4.6 Headings and Labels
>> <https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/navigation-
>> mechanisms-descriptive.html>
>> (as
>> does WAVE), since an empty heading cannot describe any "topic or
>> purpose" but it is, nonetheless, semantically, a heading. Some other very
>> knowledgable people disagree, considering this to be merely a violation of
>> best practice. Others may also think it violates WCAG SC 1.3.1
>> Information
>> and Relationships
>> <https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/content-structur
>> e-separation-programmatic.html>
>> (such
>> as WAVE, HTML Code_Sniffer and SiteImprove), and even WCAG SC 2.4.1 Bypass
>> Blocks
>> <https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/navigation-
>> mechanisms-skip.html>
>> (such
>> as WAVE), but those are probably more of stretch, in my opinion. What do
>> you think?
>>
>
> I've been known to mark these sorts of things as failure just under 1.3.1.
> I can see the interpretation that this could also fall under 2.4.6 (though
> I generally "look" at the page for anything that acts as a visible
> heading/label, and then determine if that is appropriately descriptive -
> but thinking more deeply, you've got a point). I'd say marking BOTH 1.3.1
> and 2.4.6 as fails in this case is appropriate.
>
> P
> --
> Patrick H. Lauke
>
> www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
> http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com
> twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
>
> > > > >

--
Rob Fentress
Senior Accessibility Solutions Designer
Assistive Technologies at Virginia Tech
Electronic Business Card (vCard)
<http://search.vt.edu/search/person.vcf?person54847>
LinkedIn Profile
<https://www.linkedin.com/in/rob-fentress-aa0b609?trk=profile-badge>