E-mail List Archives
Thread: Displaying Content based on previous selection
Number of posts in this thread: 8 (In chronological order)
From: JP Jamous
Date: Tue, Sep 27 2016 12:09PM
Subject: Displaying Content based on previous selection
No previous message | Next message →
Guys and Gals,
I am wondering if this violates any of level A or AA of WCAG 2.0, as I would
fail it for 3.2.2 if it were up to me.
We have a survey form that the user is redirected to after a chat session.
Some UX genius asked the developers to ask one question on page load. So you
only get one question when the page loads without a submit button. Only the
question and 5 radio buttons.
Once one of those radio buttons is selected, the rest of the form is
displayed without a page refresh. The user sees or reads with a SR the rest
of the questions and submit the form.
I think this violates Level A SC 3.2.2 Elements do not change on focus. In
this sense, when a radio button receives the focus, the elements on the page
appear. What do you guys think?
From: Beranek, Nicholas
Date: Tue, Sep 27 2016 2:32PM
Subject: Re: Displaying Content based on previous selection
← Previous message | Next message →
It's always difficult to call out SC 3.2.1 On Focus and SC 3.2.2 On Input because "change of context" is not well-defined. Can you argue that this behavior creates "content that changes the meaning of the Web page"? If so, then call out SC 3.2.1 On Focus.
This behavior is going to be confusing for everyone.
Nick
From: JP Jamous
Date: Tue, Sep 27 2016 3:11PM
Subject: Re: Displaying Content based on previous selection
← Previous message | Next message →
Nick,
That was exactly my concern. Those 2 SC keep coming up with the UX team. They are not strong enough for me to make my case.
From: Birkir R. Gunnarsson
Date: Tue, Sep 27 2016 7:12PM
Subject: Re: Displaying Content based on previous selection
← Previous message | Next message →
If the dynamic content appears, in visual and content order, after the
radiobutton that is selected to display it, I would not call it a
3.2.2 problem.
If, however, the content appears in content order before the
radiobutton that triggered it I would call it under 1.3.2/2.4.3 (not
discoverable if it is injected above the user location)
If the action of selecting the radiobutton refreshes the page or moves
focus away from the radiobutton to elsewhere on the page, I would call
it under 3.2.2
I have examples of these scenarios with dropdowns (I can attach or
post them somewhere if people are interested).
I actually think only displaying content that is relevant to the
user's selection is good usability and reduces confusion and user
interaction for everyone as long as the focus is not ripped away and
the content is discoverable.
On 9/27/16, JP Jamous < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> Nick,
>
> That was exactly my concern. Those 2 SC keep coming up with the UX team.
> They are not strong enough for me to make my case.
>
>
>
>
From: Joe Chidzik
Date: Wed, Sep 28 2016 5:05AM
Subject: Re: Displaying Content based on previous selection
← Previous message | Next message →
I agree with Birkir: if the new content appears naturally in the focus, and reading order, after the users current position, screenreader users would then naturally encounter this new content by continuing to arrow down the page. The question may benefit from additional wording describing the behaviour to users e.g.
Please select from the following options. Another question will appear once you have selected an option.
Option 1
Option 2
Etc
In this way, you won't need any aria alerts, live regions etc. Instead, by informing users that new content is going to be displayed, you will be prompting them to explore and find it themselves.
I expect most users would encounter the new content anyway through exploration, but this would help prompt those who may not.
Joe
>
From: Jim Homme
Date: Wed, Sep 28 2016 6:52AM
Subject: Re: Displaying Content based on previous selection
← Previous message | Next message →
Hi,
I think this is sound reasoning.
Jim
=========Jim Homme,
Accessibility Consultant,
Bender HighTest Accessibility Team
Bender Consulting Services, Inc.,
412-787-8567,
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
http://www.benderconsult.com/our%20services/hightest-accessible-technology-solutions
E+R=O
From: Tim Harshbarger
Date: Wed, Sep 28 2016 6:54AM
Subject: Re: Displaying Content based on previous selection
← Previous message | Next message →
If you are having problems making the point to the UX team, one potential way of addressing the problem might be to have a discussion with the UX team regarding what these success criteria mean--with the idea of trying to agree to a common understanding of what the success criteria mean. If you all can agree on a common understanding of these success criteria, then they are more likely to spot these problems sooner and it will also be easier for you to make your case to them when you see problems like this.
I will say that one of the hazards of reaching a common understanding of a success criteria through discussion with people who may not be knowledgeable about accessibility is that the common understanding won't be your understanding. But even so, it means less of a battle to convince them something needs to be addressed--and over time as their understanding becomes better, you can always have the discussion again later to see if it is time for a new common understanding.
Thanks,
Tim
From: Tyllick,Cliff S (HHSC/DADS)
Date: Wed, Sep 28 2016 9:39AM
Subject: Re: Displaying Content based on previous selection
← Previous message | No next message
In my current position I have taken on the role of interpreter of the standards, guidelines, and success criteria for our project teams. Project by project, I'm developing a set of statements that put the solutions in the context of the design they're working on. And they understand that, to the extent I define specific solutions, they are free to propose others for us to discuss. They especially understand that they're free to innovate, so long as their proposed solution is at least as accessible as the standard.
It has dramatically improved their appreciation of the need for accessibility and made them eager to show that they can achieve it.
And because we are focused on the details of a specific project, they don't have to read about stuff their design doesn't have or they can't control. For example, I don't even mention ASCII text, nor do I mention features set by a template they can't change. If, for example, the page template omits the language specification or leaves the title element unpopulated, I file a defect with the keepers of the template and let the current project team know that I have done so.
I call it "teamwork."
Cliff
Cliff Tyllick
Accessibility Coordinator
Civil Rights Office
Texas Health and Human Services Commission
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
512-438-2494
From: WebAIM-Forum < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > on behalf of Tim Harshbarger < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 7:54:10 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Displaying Content based on previous selection
If you are having problems making the point to the UX team, one potential way of addressing the problem might be to have a discussion with the UX team regarding what these success criteria mean--with the idea of trying to agree to a common understanding of what the success criteria mean. If you all can agree on a common understanding of these success criteria, then they are more likely to spot these problems sooner and it will also be easier for you to make your case to them when you see problems like this.
I will say that one of the hazards of reaching a common understanding of a success criteria through discussion with people who may not be knowledgeable about accessibility is that the common understanding won't be your understanding. But even so, it means less of a battle to convince them something needs to be addressed--and over time as their understanding becomes better, you can always have the discussion again later to see if it is time for a new common understanding.
Thanks,
Tim