E-mail List Archives

Search E-mail List Archives for

Number of posts in this thread: 8 (In chronological order)

From: Joseph Sherman
Date: Mon, Sep 25 2017 10:54AM
Subject: data table without visual headers
No previous message | Next message →

I'm evaluating an application (Degreeworks) that has tables like the following:

Psychology Psy101 B 3 Spring 2016
Math MTH101 A 2 Spring 2016

Since there are no visual column headings, is it a violation that there a no headings for screen reader users? We can't add headings since it's not our application. If everyone is equally deprived, is that ok?


Joseph

From: Jared Smith
Date: Mon, Sep 25 2017 1:22PM
Subject: Re: data table without visual headers
← Previous message | Next message →

Joseph Sherman wrote:

> If everyone is equally deprived, is that ok?

Well, it's not OK if you want it to be reasonable usable by anyone.

But I don't believe this would be a WCAG 2.0 failure. The relevant
success criterion is 1.3.1 which deals with visual presentation and
relationships being provided programmatically. Because there are not
visual headers for this table, there are no visual relationships that
would need to be provided via page semantics.

Jared

From: Birkir R. Gunnarsson
Date: Mon, Sep 25 2017 2:57PM
Subject: Re: data table without visual headers
← Previous message | Next message →

The only potential accessibility fail (as opposed o usability fai) is
if the course names are displayed in a larger/different font, in which
case they should be markd up as row headers.


On 9/25/17, Jared Smith < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> Joseph Sherman wrote:
>
>> If everyone is equally deprived, is that ok?
>
> Well, it's not OK if you want it to be reasonable usable by anyone.
>
> But I don't believe this would be a WCAG 2.0 failure. The relevant
> success criterion is 1.3.1 which deals with visual presentation and
> relationships being provided programmatically. Because there are not
> visual headers for this table, there are no visual relationships that
> would need to be provided via page semantics.
>
> Jared
> > > > >


--
Work hard. Have fun. Make history.

From: Shane Anderson
Date: Wed, Sep 27 2017 5:50AM
Subject: Re: data table without visual headers
← Previous message | Next message →

Jared and Birkir,

Do you feel that 2.4.6 wouldn't apply here?

In principle I think 2.4.6 covers the issue. However, 2.4.6 only explicitly
mentions headings and labels.

Shane

Regards
Shane Anderson


On Mon, Sep 25, 2017 at 4:57 PM, Birkir R. Gunnarsson <
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:

> The only potential accessibility fail (as opposed o usability fai) is
> if the course names are displayed in a larger/different font, in which
> case they should be markd up as row headers.
>
>
> On 9/25/17, Jared Smith < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> > Joseph Sherman wrote:
> >
> >> If everyone is equally deprived, is that ok?
> >
> > Well, it's not OK if you want it to be reasonable usable by anyone.
> >
> > But I don't believe this would be a WCAG 2.0 failure. The relevant
> > success criterion is 1.3.1 which deals with visual presentation and
> > relationships being provided programmatically. Because there are not
> > visual headers for this table, there are no visual relationships that
> > would need to be provided via page semantics.
> >
> > Jared
> > > > > > > > > >
>
>
> --
> Work hard. Have fun. Make history.
> > > > >

From: Jared Smith
Date: Wed, Sep 27 2017 7:27AM
Subject: Re: data table without visual headers
← Previous message | Next message →

Shane Anderson wrote:

> Do you feel that 2.4.6 wouldn't apply here?

2.4.6 doesn't require that headings or labels (or perhaps table
headers) exist. It only requires that if they do exist that they
accurately describe the topic or purpose. So in this case if
inaccurate table headers were present, then this could probably apply.
But I think it a stretch that this SC would require that headers be
present at all. Or at least that's how I would interpret it.

Jared

From: Birkir R. Gunnarsson
Date: Wed, Sep 27 2017 8:01AM
Subject: Re: data table without visual headers
← Previous message | Next message →

Agree with Jared

The way I view it is that 1.3.1 requires that semantic elements be
used appropriately (mind you, 1.3.1 only says that if the information
is communicated visually it needs to be available programmatically or
in text).
2.4.6 only deals with the content of headings and labels. I've actualy
found 2.4.6 to be a pretty useless success criterion honestly, very
rarely have I invoked it, primarily for labels on buttons.



On 9/27/17, Jared Smith < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> Shane Anderson wrote:
>
>> Do you feel that 2.4.6 wouldn't apply here?
>
> 2.4.6 doesn't require that headings or labels (or perhaps table
> headers) exist. It only requires that if they do exist that they
> accurately describe the topic or purpose. So in this case if
> inaccurate table headers were present, then this could probably apply.
> But I think it a stretch that this SC would require that headers be
> present at all. Or at least that's how I would interpret it.
>
> Jared
> > > > >


--
Work hard. Have fun. Make history.

From: Sailesh Panchang
Date: Wed, Sep 27 2017 12:15PM
Subject: Re: data table without visual headers
← Previous message | Next message →

"Info relations conveyed by presentation" also refers to semantics
conveyed by positioning / visual styling.
If the text that follows the course name is positioned such that they
appear as separate and distinct elements apparently in a column, the
table surely needs row headers to pass 1.3.1.


On 9/27/17, Birkir R. Gunnarsson < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> Agree with Jared
>
> The way I view it is that 1.3.1 requires that semantic elements be
> used appropriately (mind you, 1.3.1 only says that if the information
> is communicated visually it needs to be available programmatically or
> in text).
> 2.4.6 only deals with the content of headings and labels. I've actualy
> found 2.4.6 to be a pretty useless success criterion honestly, very
> rarely have I invoked it, primarily for labels on buttons.
>
>
>
> On 9/27/17, Jared Smith < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
>> Shane Anderson wrote:
>>
>>> Do you feel that 2.4.6 wouldn't apply here?
>>
>> 2.4.6 doesn't require that headings or labels (or perhaps table
>> headers) exist. It only requires that if they do exist that they
>> accurately describe the topic or purpose. So in this case if
>> inaccurate table headers were present, then this could probably apply.
>> But I think it a stretch that this SC would require that headers be
>> present at all. Or at least that's how I would interpret it.
>>
>> Jared
>> >> >> >> >>
>
>
> --
> Work hard. Have fun. Make history.
> > > > >


--
Sailesh Panchang
Principal Accessibility Consultant
Deque Systems Inc
Phone 703-225-0380 ext 105
Mobile: 571-344-1765

From: Birkir R. Gunnarsson
Date: Wed, Sep 27 2017 5:25PM
Subject: Re: data table without visual headers
← Previous message | No next message

Exactly, but 1.3.1 would not require adding column headers for the
table (since there are no visible column headers).


On 9/27/17, Sailesh Panchang < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> "Info relations conveyed by presentation" also refers to semantics
> conveyed by positioning / visual styling.
> If the text that follows the course name is positioned such that they
> appear as separate and distinct elements apparently in a column, the
> table surely needs row headers to pass 1.3.1.
>
>
> On 9/27/17, Birkir R. Gunnarsson < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
>> Agree with Jared
>>
>> The way I view it is that 1.3.1 requires that semantic elements be
>> used appropriately (mind you, 1.3.1 only says that if the information
>> is communicated visually it needs to be available programmatically or
>> in text).
>> 2.4.6 only deals with the content of headings and labels. I've actualy
>> found 2.4.6 to be a pretty useless success criterion honestly, very
>> rarely have I invoked it, primarily for labels on buttons.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 9/27/17, Jared Smith < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
>>> Shane Anderson wrote:
>>>
>>>> Do you feel that 2.4.6 wouldn't apply here?
>>>
>>> 2.4.6 doesn't require that headings or labels (or perhaps table
>>> headers) exist. It only requires that if they do exist that they
>>> accurately describe the topic or purpose. So in this case if
>>> inaccurate table headers were present, then this could probably apply.
>>> But I think it a stretch that this SC would require that headers be
>>> present at all. Or at least that's how I would interpret it.
>>>
>>> Jared
>>> >>> >>> >>> >>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Work hard. Have fun. Make history.
>> >> >> >> >>
>
>
> --
> Sailesh Panchang
> Principal Accessibility Consultant
> Deque Systems Inc
> Phone 703-225-0380 ext 105
> Mobile: 571-344-1765
> > > > >


--
Work hard. Have fun. Make history.