E-mail List Archives

Search E-mail List Archives for

Number of posts in this thread: 7 (In chronological order)

From: Reinhard Stebner
Date: Thu, Apr 21 2022 6:54PM
Subject: When to use WCAG 2.4.3and WCAG 2.1.1
No previous message | Next message →

I am looking for good resources that will have good explanations of when to use WCAG 2.4.3 and WCAG 2.1.1. I have been given a task by my team lead to write a comparison and contrast of these two guidelines.

From: Birkir R. Gunnarsson
Date: Thu, Apr 21 2022 7:48PM
Subject: Re: When to use WCAG 2.4.3and WCAG 2.1.1
← Previous message | Next message →

On 4/21/22, Reinhard Stebner < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> I am looking for good resources that will have good explanations of when to
> use WCAG 2.4.3 and WCAG 2.1.1. I have been given a task by my team lead to
> write a comparison and contrast of these two guidelines.
> > > > >


--
Work hard. Have fun. Make history.

From: Patrick H. Lauke
Date: Fri, Apr 22 2022 2:12AM
Subject: Re: When to use WCAG 2.4.3and WCAG 2.1.1
← Previous message | Next message →

On 22/04/2022 01:54, Reinhard Stebner wrote:
> I am looking for good resources that will have good explanations of when to use WCAG 2.4.3 and WCAG 2.1.1. I have been given a task by my team lead to write a comparison and contrast of these two guidelines.

2.1.1 "is there a way to operate this with the keyboard at all?"

2.4.3 "is the focus order logical/correct, is focus handled properly?"

They're independent of each other, really...

P
--
Patrick H. Lauke

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

From: jp Jamous
Date: Fri, Apr 22 2022 8:32AM
Subject: Re: When to use WCAG 2.4.3and WCAG 2.1.1
← Previous message | Next message →

Reinhard,

I don't know of a reference that would give you such comparison. I can help you explain it, but you are not allowed to plagiarize. *Smiles*

I am going to keep my explanation simple and to the point, without covering the technical aspect of it.
2.1.1 focuses on ensuring that every HTML element that can be operated by a user is responsive to keyboard functionality. In other words, if it can be operated via the mouse, it must be fully operable via the keyboard. It's that simple.
2.4.3 focuses on the order of navigation from one focusable element to another. This ensures that visually and programmatically the navigation is logical and meaningful, as the designer intended it to be. If 2.4.3 fails, it would automatically fail 2.4.7 from a visual perspective, because the visual outline would be visually jumping all over the page or its various sections. On the other hand, failure of 2.4.3 can automatically fail 1.3.2 - (Meaningful Sequence), because screen reader users may not be able to make sense of how a "billing" link was included amongst the "various Support" links in a dropdown menu.

In summation, 2.1.1 is to ensure keyboard users can operate the elements that are operable by mouse users. Whereas 2.4.8 ensures that the keyboard user is not disoriented both visually, using visible focus indicator, or programmatically, using a screen reader.


From: WebAIM-Forum < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > On Behalf Of Reinhard Stebner
Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2022 7:54 PM
To: WebAIM Discussion List < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Subject: [WebAIM] When to use WCAG 2.4.3and WCAG 2.1.1

I am looking for good resources that will have good explanations of when to use WCAG 2.4.3 and WCAG 2.1.1. I have been given a task by my team lead to write a comparison and contrast of these two guid
External ( = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = <mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >)
INKY is learning...<https://protection.inkyphishfence.com/report?id=bmV0b3JnZnQxMDM2OTU1NC9qcEBqZXBlbHN5LmNvbS80NWU2NWM1NmMyYTU3NDQyN2E2MWRjNTY2NmNhYzBhYS8xNjUwNTg4ODgxLjY2#key8c082392072be3c20bd88f7a95bb1f4> Report This Email<https://protection.inkyphishfence.com/report?id=bmV0b3JnZnQxMDM2OTU1NC9qcEBqZXBlbHN5LmNvbS80NWU2NWM1NmMyYTU3NDQyN2E2MWRjNTY2NmNhYzBhYS8xNjUwNTg4ODgxLjY2#key8c082392072be3c20bd88f7a95bb1f4> FAQ<https://www.inky.com/banner-faq> GoDaddy Advanced Email Security, Powered by INKY<https://www.inky.com/protection-by-inky>


I am looking for good resources that will have good explanations of when to use WCAG 2.4.3 and WCAG 2.1.1. I have been given a task by my team lead to write a comparison and contrast of these two guidelines.

From: Patrick H. Lauke
Date: Fri, Apr 22 2022 8:59AM
Subject: Re: When to use WCAG 2.4.3and WCAG 2.1.1
← Previous message | Next message →

On 22/04/2022 15:32, jp Jamous wrote:
> Reinhard,
>
> I don't know of a reference that would give you such comparison. I can help you explain it, but you are not allowed to plagiarize. *Smiles*
>
> I am going to keep my explanation simple and to the point, without covering the technical aspect of it.
> 2.1.1 focuses on ensuring that every HTML element that can be operated by a user is responsive to keyboard functionality. In other words, if it can be operated via the mouse, it must be fully operable via the keyboard. It's that simple.

Slight tweak: it's making sure *functionality* that can be operated via
the mouse (or touch, or whatever other input) can also be operated with
the keyboard. This may or may not be tied to a specific HTML element per se.

You could have an interface made purely from non-focusable controls that
respond to mouse clicks, and in parallel have a whole set of key event
listeners on the body of the page that let you trigger the same
functionality that a mouse user could, and it would pass 2.1.1, for
instance.

P
--
Patrick H. Lauke

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

From: Mark Magennis
Date: Fri, Apr 22 2022 9:01AM
Subject: Re: When to use WCAG 2.4.3and WCAG 2.1.1
← Previous message | Next message →

JP, I think your explanation of 2.1.1 is a little misleading. You say "every HTML element that can be operated by a user is responsive to keyboard functionality" but it's about functions, not elements. So for example you could have an element that is clickable using a mouse but not accessible using the keyboard and that would be okay as long as you can carry out the function that it does using the keyboard by some other means.

Regards,
Mark

From: jp Jamous
Date: Fri, Apr 22 2022 9:19AM
Subject: Re: When to use WCAG 2.4.3and WCAG 2.1.1
← Previous message | No next message

Mark,

You are correct about this. However, I did not want to complicate things. I wanted to keep them simple.

On another note, it is best to have the same approach with inclusive design rather than using 2 different approaches. While this may not always be possible, it is best to lean toward inclusivity so the user experience is the same. This can be quite beneficial for UX Designers when applying accessibility to their designs. They typically don't like to have 2 separate ways of doing things.

I try to keep my responses simple. It is easy to get into a rabbit hole with WCAG. Different cases require different approaches. 😊



From: WebAIM-Forum < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > On Behalf Of Mark Magennis
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2022 10:02 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] [EXTERNAL] Re: When to use WCAG 2.4.3and WCAG 2.1.1

JP, I think your explanation of 2.1.1 is a little misleading. You say "every HTML element that can be operated by a user is responsive to keyboard functionality" but it's about functions, not elements
External ( = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = <mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >)
INKY is learning...<https://protection.inkyphishfence.com/report?id=bmV0b3JnZnQxMDM2OTU1NC9qcEBqZXBlbHN5LmNvbS9iNDY2NGM0MDc4ODk5NDU3NjEzOWEzMWQxZmE5MDZkZi8xNjUwNjM5NzA2LjI3#keyq960b67c2cfaa648b8686a3ae4ea2d5> Report This Email<https://protection.inkyphishfence.com/report?id=bmV0b3JnZnQxMDM2OTU1NC9qcEBqZXBlbHN5LmNvbS9iNDY2NGM0MDc4ODk5NDU3NjEzOWEzMWQxZmE5MDZkZi8xNjUwNjM5NzA2LjI3#keyq960b67c2cfaa648b8686a3ae4ea2d5> FAQ<https://www.inky.com/banner-faq> GoDaddy Advanced Email Security, Powered by INKY<https://www.inky.com/protection-by-inky>


JP, I think your explanation of 2.1.1 is a little misleading. You say "every HTML element that can be operated by a user is responsive to keyboard functionality" but it's about functions, not elements. So for example you could have an element that is clickable using a mouse but not accessible using the keyboard and that would be okay as long as you can carry out the function that it does using the keyboard by some other means.



Regards,

Mark