E-mail List Archives
Thread: conforming alternate version
Number of posts in this thread: 2 (In chronological order)
From: glen walker
Date: Sat, Oct 19 2019 1:28PM
Subject: conforming alternate version
No previous message | Next message →
I was looking for an example where a conforming alternate version is
provided. If I go to Bloomingdales and view a list of products, for
example coats:
https://www.bloomingdales.com/shop/mens/coats-jackets?id=11548&cm_sp=NAVIGATION-_-TOP_NAV-_-11548-Clothing-Coats-%26-Jackets
If you mouse hover over a product, it shows you the back of the coat.
Using a keyboard, there's no way to see the back view. However, there's a
"quick view" button that's accessible from the keyboard that displays a
dialog that allows you to view the back of the coat using the keyboard.
Ignoring the other a11y issues in that dialog, would this be considered a
conforming alternate version?
It seems to satisfy the definition of conforming alternate version -
https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#dfn-conforming-alternate-version
In this situation, I'm not talking about a completely separate conforming
page for the product listing. It's just a conforming alternative just for
the "view back of coat" feature.
This is just an educational exercise. I'm not endorsing using conforming
alternatives. I'm just curious if this one satisfies.
If you wanted to fix this problem directly on the product listing page,
would you recommend a separate button for "see back of coat", or simply a
toggle button for view front/back? Or maybe follow the mouse hover
paradigm and show the back of the coat when the image receives focus and
show the front when it doesn't have focus. I suppose either is acceptable
and a design/usability question.
(Note that there's a keyboard trap on the product listing page. You can't
tab to the 2nd or remaining products in the list so hopefully you like the
first product on the page.)
From: Birkir R. Gunnarsson
Date: Sat, Oct 19 2019 6:45PM
Subject: Re: conforming alternate version
← Previous message | No next message
This would be a conforming alternate version (assuming the version is
accessible of course).
1. It can be triggered from the non-conforming page
2. It has all the same information
3. It is accessible.
There are a couple of situations where this comes into play.
3 that I remember having worked on in the past.
1. A page ith links to an inaccessible and an accessible PDF.
2. A page with a messed up hover menu, but clicking the link you would
hover over to see the menu takes you to a anding page, the landing
page ust have all the sme links as the menu to pass (still not a good
uability mind).
3. For a page where you could report a car insurance claim you could
click on the part of the car that has the damage or select the damage
area from a set of checkvoxes
The tricky part is to make sure the accessible version has all the
same info as the inaccessible one and that this parity is maintained
(and that's where most conforming alternate versions eventually break
down). The inaccessible version is updated but everyone forgets about
the accessible version.
On 10/19/19, glen walker < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> I was looking for an example where a conforming alternate version is
> provided. If I go to Bloomingdales and view a list of products, for
> example coats:
>
> https://www.bloomingdales.com/shop/mens/coats-jackets?id=11548&cm_sp=NAVIGATION-_-TOP_NAV-_-11548-Clothing-Coats-%26-Jackets
>
> If you mouse hover over a product, it shows you the back of the coat.
> Using a keyboard, there's no way to see the back view. However, there's a
> "quick view" button that's accessible from the keyboard that displays a
> dialog that allows you to view the back of the coat using the keyboard.
> Ignoring the other a11y issues in that dialog, would this be considered a
> conforming alternate version?
>
> It seems to satisfy the definition of conforming alternate version -
> https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#dfn-conforming-alternate-version
>
> In this situation, I'm not talking about a completely separate conforming
> page for the product listing. It's just a conforming alternative just for
> the "view back of coat" feature.
>
> This is just an educational exercise. I'm not endorsing using conforming
> alternatives. I'm just curious if this one satisfies.
>
> If you wanted to fix this problem directly on the product listing page,
> would you recommend a separate button for "see back of coat", or simply a
> toggle button for view front/back? Or maybe follow the mouse hover
> paradigm and show the back of the coat when the image receives focus and
> show the front when it doesn't have focus. I suppose either is acceptable
> and a design/usability question.
>
> (Note that there's a keyboard trap on the product listing page. You can't
> tab to the 2nd or remaining products in the list so hopefully you like the
> first product on the page.)
> > > > >
--
Work hard. Have fun. Make history.