万博体育官网网址-WebAIM博客 http://www.kanehsu.com/blog WebAIM Web辅助功能博客 2018年10月31日星期三18:51:42 +0000 EN-US 每小时 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.9.8 视力低下的用户调查#2结果 http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/low-vision-survey2-results/ http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/low-vision-survey2-results/#respond 2018年10月31日星期三18:51:42 +0000 杰瑞德史密斯 未分类 http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/ 我们在2018年9月的低视力用户调查结果可在http://www.kanehsu.com/projects/lowvisionsurvey2/上获得。以下是一些有趣且值得注意的项目:75%的受访者报告了多种类型的视力损害61.3%具有光或眩光敏感度,46.8%具有对比敏感度51.4%的受访者表示使用某种类型的高对比度模式[&#8230;] <p>The results from our September 2018 Survey of Users with Low Vision are available at <a href="http://www.kanehsu.com/projects/lowvisionsurvey2/">http://www.kanehsu.com/projects/lowvisionsurvey2/</a>.</p> <p>Here are a few interesting and notable items:</p> <ul> <li>75% of respondents report multiple types of visual impairment61.3% have light or glare sensitivity and 46.8% have contrast sensitivity.</li> <li>51.4% of respondents report using some type of high contrast mode71.2% of users that adjust page contrast prefer light text on a dark background.</li> <li>45.2% of respondents use a screen reader, 48.4% screen magnification software, and 44% browser zoom controlsOther types of settings and AT are commonly used.</li> <li>JAWS is the most common screen reader, followed by NVDA and VoiceOverNarrator is rarely used (.8%).</li> <li>Only 8% were detected as having increased the default text sizeVery few respondents adjust paragraph, line, word, or letter spacing.</li> <li>60.4% always or often use a keyboard for web page navigationThis is a very high number of users that rely on keyboard accessibility.</li> <li>22% of respondents don&#8217;t enlarge web content, while 18% of respondents enlarge to over 400%.</li> <li>Dedicated screen magnification software is not highly commonMost users rely on OS settings for magnification.</li> <li>64.3% use iOS devicesOnly 7.8% don&#8217;t use a mobile device at all.</li> </ul> <p>Much more is available in <a href="http://www.kanehsu.com/projects/lowvisionsurvey2/">the survey results article</a>.</p> http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/low-vision-survey2-results/feed/ 0 Dinolytics发布和WAVE路线图 http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/dinolytics-release-wave-roadmap/ http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/dinolytics-release-wave-roadmap/#respond 星期四,2019年9月27日20:46:54 +0000 杰瑞德史密斯 未分类 http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/ We&#8217;re happy to announce the release of Dinolytics &#8211; an enterprise-level web accessibility evaluation system based on WAVE我们在Pope Tech的合作伙伴已经开发和精炼了Dinolytics近一年While Dinolytics is already being used by over 120 organizations in Higher Ed, K-12, Hospitality, Entertainment, Government, eCommerce, and the Financial industry, [&#8230;] <p><img src="http://wave.www.kanehsu.com/img/dinolytics.png" alt="Dinolytics logo" style="float:right;width:250px;border:1px solid grey;" />We&#8217;re happy to announce the release of <a href="https://dinolytics.com/">Dinolytics</a> &#8211; an enterprise-level web accessibility evaluation system based on WAVE我们在Pope Tech的合作伙伴已经开发和精炼了Dinolytics近一年While Dinolytics is already being used by over 120 organizations in Higher Ed, K-12, Hospitality, Entertainment, Government, eCommerce, and the Financial industry, today&#8217;s release marks a significant milestone for web accessibility toolsThis cost-effective, powerful tool is intended to disrupt the market and help organizations large and small significantly improve their web site accessibility for people with disabilities.</p> <h2>Dinolytics Features</h2> <p>Dinolytics offers the following features:</p> <ul> <li>Powered by the time-tested and popular WAVE accessibility evaluation engineBased primarily on WCAG 2.1, the full power and educational 万博亚洲体育官网 of WAVE are incorporated directly into Dinolytics.</li> <li>Site-wide accessibility scanning and monitoring over timeDinolytics takes the page-specific accessibility details of WAVE and makes them available for your entire web presence.</li> <li>Unlimited scans on any number of web sites! Pricing is based on the number of pages you want to scan, but you&#8217;re then free to analyze those pages as often as you needYou can be up and running with usable accessibility data in a matter of minutes.</li> <li>Unlimited users! Users can be assigned to customizable groups and will only see accessibility issues for pages that are relevant to them.</li> <li>Excellent supportBeyond useful and educational documentation on using Dinolytics and interpreting your accessibility scan results, the Dinolytics team will help you along the way.</li> <li>Unlike many accessibility monitoring tools, the Dinolytics interface is authored to be highly 万博体育官网网址 to users with disabilities.</li> </ul> <p>A Dinolytics user recently reported:</p> <blockquote><p> &#8220;We’re happy to report that we’ve cut our errors down across the board by almost two thirds with the help of DinolyticsWe expected the first moves to have major impacts but boy is that satisfying seeing the graph go down like that.&#8221;</p></blockquote> <p>We&#8217;re excited for the potential that Dinolytics has to help your organization in its accessibility effortsYou can learn more or schedule a demo at <a href="https://dinolytics.com/">dinolytics.com</a>.</p> <h2>WAVE Roadmap</h2> <p>It&#8217;s also an exciting time in the development of WAVEWe&#8217;re currently undertaking a notable update to the WAVE evaluation engine此更新将提高性能和准确性We&#8217;ll also be refining and adding new WAVE &#8216;rules&#8217; or evaluation logicWhile most of the new WCAG 2.1 success criteria are not testable in an automated way, we&#8217;ll be adding new tests to give feedback where possible on these new guidelinesThese updates will initially be rolled out in the <a href="https://wave.www.kanehsu.com/api">WAVE API</a> and <a href="https://wave.www.kanehsu.com/standalone">WAVE stand-alone API</a>, and then in the <a href="https://wave.www.kanehsu.com/">online</a> and <a href="https://wave.www.kanehsu.com/extension">Firefox and Chrome extension</a> versions of WAVE.</p> <p>With these updates in place, WebAIM will be using WAVE to collect broad sets of data about accessibilityWe believe that getting a better sense of the trends and patterns of accessibility issues across the web will help us better address them in the future.</p> <p>WAVE will also see a significant visual faceliftA cleaner, more usable interface is being designed, with slick SVG icons.</p> <p>The future for WAVE and Dinolytics is brightWe&#8217;d love to hear from you about how we can make these tools even better.</p> http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/dinolytics-release-wave-roadmap/feed/ 0 网络无障碍从业者调查#2结果 http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/practitionersurvey2/ 星期四,2018年5月31日20:23:23 +0000 杰瑞德史密斯 未分类 http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/ 2018年4月网络无障碍从业人员调查的结果现已在http://www.kanehsu.com/projects/practitionersurvey2/上提供。共有724名受访者这是2014年从业人员调查的后续行动Here are a few interesting and surprising findings: Those in the web accessibility field were generally older, better paid, and better educated than our peers in [&#8230;] <p>The results from the April 2018 Survey of Web Accessibility Practitioners are now available at <a href="http://www.kanehsu.com/projects/practitionersurvey2/">http://www.kanehsu.com/projects/practitionersurvey2/</a>共有724名受访者This was a follow-up to <a href="http://www.kanehsu.com/projects/practitionersurvey/">the 2014 Practitioners Survey</a>.</p> <p>Here are a few interesting and surprising findings:</p> <ul> <li>Those in the web accessibility field were generally older, better paid, and better educated than our peers in broader web design/development.</li> <li>26.4% of respondents reported having a disabilityThis is significantly higher than other technology fields.</li> <li>Salary disparity was reported between men and women, though this pay gap has gotten smaller since 2014In corporations/industry, women reported making slightly more than men, though women made notably less than men in other sectors, especially education, government, and self-employment</li> <li>Respondents with disabilities made notably less than those without disabilities, though this reported pay gap has decreased significantly since 2014.</li> <li>Chrome was the most popular browser among respondents at 52.5%Usage of Chrome was lower among respondents with disabilities, though its use by this audience increased to 38% from 16.6% in 2014.</li> <li>63.1% of respondents indicated that their organization&#8217;s web site is highly 万博体育官网网址.</li> <li>Respondents were generally positive about web accessibility progress and the impact that ARIA has had on the web.</li> <li>Only 7.2% of respondents learned anything substantive about web accessibility in their formal schooling.</li> <li>NVDA was the most popular screen reader used in testing, followed by VoiceOver and JAWS残疾受访者(主要是JAWS)使用的屏幕阅读器存在差异those without disabilities (primarily NVDA and VoiceOver).</li> <li>A wide variety of testing tools were used, with WAVE, aXe, Google Developer Tools, online contrast checkers, and accessibility bookmarklets/scripts being most commonly used.</li> <li>There were significant disparities between what motivates web accessibility practitioners and what they say motivates their organizations to implement accessibilityIndividuals were primarily motivated by morals (it&#8217;s the right thing to do), whereas this is reported to be at much lower levels for organizations.</li> <li>Respondents generally indicated having a positive impact on the lives of people with disabilities.</li> </ul> <p>Additional data and details are available in <a href="http://www.kanehsu.com/projects/practitionersurvey2/">the full survey results</a>.</p> Overly 万博体育官网网址? http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/overly-万博体育官网网址/ http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/overly-万博体育官网网址/#评论 星期四,2018年3月1日00:01:51 +0000 杰瑞德史密斯 未分类 http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/ 我被邀请在上周发表关于大学商业信息系统课程的网络可访问性的演讲During the presentation a student asked a fantastic question &#8211; &#8220;Is it possible for a web page to be overly 万博体育官网网址?&#8221; I&#8217;ve been working in the accessibility field for a very long time, but had never [&#8230;] <p>上周,我受邀为大学商业信息系统课程的网络无障碍提供演讲During the presentation a student asked a fantastic question &#8211; <strong>&#8220;Is it possible for a web page to be overly 万博体育官网网址?&#8221;</strong></p> <p>I&#8217;ve been working in the accessibility field for a very long time, but had never been asked or really considered this在回答之前我不得不暂停并考虑这个问题我后来决定在Twitter上提出同样的问题Some people responded &#8220;yes&#8221; and others &#8220;no&#8221; to this question, but I noticed a particular theme in the disparate responses.</p> <h2>&#8220;Yes&#8221; responses</h2> <p>Here&#8217;s a sampling of responses indicating that pages can be overly 万博体育官网网址.</p> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en"> <p lang="en" dir="ltr">In the sense that you could load it down with too much metadata, totallyEspecially if you think you&#39;re helping.</p> <p>&mdash; Matt May (@mattmay) <a href="https://twitter.com/mattmay/status/966863551385165824?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 23, 2018</a></p></blockquote> <p><script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></p> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en"> <p lang="en" dir="ltr">I feel the same wayWe often see situations where devs mean well, and just go overboard with aria and explanations through off screen text no one really needs</p> <p>Too much of a good thing can easily turn into a bad thing.</p> <p>&mdash; Denis Boudreau (@dboudreau) <a href="https://twitter.com/dboudreau/status/966867036386275329?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 23, 2018</a></p></blockquote> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en"> <p lang="en" dir="ltr">I think it can if there&#39;s too many invisible things just for screen reader users only like many skip links, hidden headings everywhere.</p> <p>&mdash; Paul JAdam (@pauljadam) <a href="https://twitter.com/pauljadam/status/966866036225138688?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 23, 2018</a></p></blockquote> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en"> <p lang="en" dir="ltr">YesWhen the accessibility design gets in the way of productivity by providing too much information, I&#39;d consider that to be too much accessibility额外(通常是不必要的)措辞以及过多使用ARIA的方法就是一些例子<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/accessibility?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#accessibility</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/a11y?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#a11y</a></p> <p>&mdash; Pratik Patel (@ppatel) <a href="https://twitter.com/ppatel/status/966897426119323650?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 23, 2018</a></p></blockquote> <h2>&#8220;No&#8221; responses</h2> <p>Here are some of the responses that indicated that a page cannot be overly 万博体育官网网址:</p> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en"> <p lang="en" dir="ltr">No! 万博体育官网网址 essentially means &quot;equal&quot;, something cannot be &quot;too equal&quot;</p> <p>&mdash; holistica11y (@dylanbarrell) <a href="https://twitter.com/dylanbarrell/status/967041666141052928?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 23, 2018</a></p></blockquote> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en"> <p lang="en" dir="ltr">No我在万博体育官网网站上定义过多的万博体育官网网址You can make the experience worse by implementing accessibility features incorrectly, which is the antithesis of accessibility as a practice / design philosophy.</p> <p>&mdash; caitlynmayers (@caitlynmayers) <a href="https://twitter.com/caitlynmayers/status/966863785188364288?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 23, 2018</a></p></blockquote> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en"> <p lang="en" dir="ltr">Most of the examples given here are examples of bad web page design and badly applied <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/a11y?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#a11y</a> &#8211; not “too much accessibility”They’re reducing <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/a11y?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#a11y</a>, not too much <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/a11y?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#a11y</a>.</p> <p>&mdash; Joe Ortenzi (@wheelyweb) <a href="https://twitter.com/wheelyweb/status/967261008178823169?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 24, 2018</a></p></blockquote> <blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en"> <p lang="en" dir="ltr">No, this is binary: either all users can get at the information they need/want, or notNoone said 万博体育官网网址 meant &quot;good&quot;, or &quot;pretty&quot; after all.</p> <p>&mdash; Tina Holmboe (@TinaHolmboe) <a href="https://twitter.com/TinaHolmboe/status/967001320719896576?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 23, 2018</a></p></blockquote> <h2>What is &#8220;accessibility&#8221;?</h2> <p>The differences in these responses highlights an important distinction about how we view and represent the concept of accessibility<strong>The &#8220;yes&#8221; respondents viewed accessibility as the process, techniques, and code aspects of what we build online.</strong> These can clearly can be overdone, thus making a page &#8220;overly 万博体育官网网址&#8221;.</p> <p><strong>The &#8220;no&#8221; respondents viewed accessibility as an equivalent end user experience.</strong> A page cannot be &#8220;overly equivalent&#8221;.</p> <p>Both parties are correct可访问性既是一个过程,也是一种哲学While our goal is &#8220;accessibility&#8221; (equivalence for end users), we do this by implementing &#8220;accessibility&#8221; (techniques and code)For those of us in the accessibility field, I think it&#8217;s important to consider these different meanings and to be careful with how we present them.</p> <p>And that is why this question from the student caused me to pause and really consider my response, which was essentially &#8220;Yes, if you think of accessibility as code practices and techniques, then these can be overdone resulting in a less than optimal end user experienceBut if you think of accessibility as being that end user experience, then no, you can&#8217;t make a site overly 万博体育官网网址 because those accessibility improvements would inherently benefit everyone.&#8221;</p> http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/overly-万博体育官网网址/原料/ 9 DOJ撤销ADA规则制定流程 http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/dojhaltswebguidance/ http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/dojhaltswebguidance/#comments 2017年12月22日星期五22:53:40 +0000 杰瑞德史密斯 未分类 http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/ 今天,司法部宣布它正在撤销根据“美国残疾人法案”更新网站技术指南的流程This leaves the web in a precarious position &#8211; one where inaccessibility can be considered discriminatory, but without any guidance as to what &#8220;inaccessibility&#8221; actually meansIn 2010, the DOJ issued [&#8230;] <p>Today <a href="https://www.adatitleiii.com/2017/12/doj-nixes-all-pending-ada-rulemakings-including-website-access-rules/">the Department of Justice announced</a> that it is withdrawing the process for updating technical guidance for websites under the Americans with Disabilities ActThis leaves the web in a precarious position &#8211; one where inaccessibility can be considered discriminatory, but without any guidance as to what &#8220;inaccessibility&#8221; actually means.</p> <p>In 2010, the DOJ issued an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking which clarified that the web is covered by the ADA &#8211; an in万博体育官网网址 web site could be considered discrimination against users with disabilities他们承诺,该声明的定义范围和技术指导即将出台They missed numerous self-defined deadlines for providing such guidance, then in April 2016 issued a <a href="https://www.ada.gov/regs2016/sanprm.html">Supplemental Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking</a> to seek additional feedback and guidance on how best to define and implement technical web standardsWebAIM, and many other entities, provided detailed feedback and recommendations to the DOJ&#8217;s 123 questions (<a href="http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/webaims-sanprm-response/">read WebAIM&#8217;s response here</a>)Today&#8217;s action seemingly negates those 7 years of effort and feedback.</p> <p>Throughout this process, complaints via the Office of Civil Rights and lawsuits and threats of lawsuits regarding web accessibility have skyrocketedWhile we absolutely support such actions where people have truly encountered discrimination and web access barriers online, many of these have had other motivations &#8211; demands for legal nuisance payments to avoid litigationMany of these threats provide little documentation of actual accessibility issues or how they negatively impact actual users &#8211; and sometimes entities that have very reasonable levels of accessibility have found themselves in the crosshairs simply because they are more likely to pay a nuisance fee than fight a lawsuit.</p> <p>While these threats of lawsuits have certainly brought about change, they have done so in <a href="http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/motivating-accessibility-change/">less than optimal ways</a>, sometimes creating a culture of animosity toward people with disabilities.</p> <p>Of course the solution to all of this is true accessibility, and there&#8217;s little excuse for entities to not be making reasonable efforts to address accessibilityRegardless, the administration&#8217;s decision to bury the prospect of this important guidance is very disappointing and promulgates an environment of confusion and fear如果进一步打开通往未经检查的威胁和诉讼的大门我们鼓励您联系您当选的代表,表示不赞成这一行动,并鼓励立法,而不是行政行动,对此重要事项。</ p> http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/dojhaltswebguidance/feed/ 3 Screen Reader User Survey #7 Results http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/survey7results/ http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/survey7results/#comments 2017年12月21日星期四22:08:41 +0000 杰瑞德史密斯 未分类 http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/ The full results from our most recent Screen Reader User Survey are available at http://www.kanehsu.com/projects/screenreadersurvey7/该调查有1792份有效回复,于2017年10月进行Here are a few notable items and changes from previous surveys (the most recent having been conducted in July 2015): This survey had more representation world-wide then [&#8230;] <p>The full results from our most recent Screen Reader User Survey are available at <a href="http://www.kanehsu.com/projects/screenreadersurvey7/">http://www.kanehsu.com/projects/screenreadersurvey7/</a>.</p> <p>There were 1792 valid responses to the survey, which was conducted October 2017.</p> <p>Here are a few notable items and changes from previous surveys (the most recent having been conducted in July 2015):</p> <ul> <li>This survey had more representation world-wide then previous surveys.</li> <li>10.9% of respondents reported not having a disability从这些用户(可能是测试人员或其他可访问性倡导者)收集信息,我们可以更好地识别残疾人的屏幕阅读器用户的使用和意见差异In general, there are typically few differences, though some notable differences are identified in the survey results.</li> <li>JAWS continued to be the most common primary screen reader at 46.6%NVDA (31.9%) and VoiceOver (11.7%) were also common primary screen readersOther screen readers are rarely used.</li> <li>ZoomText and Window-Eyes saw significant decreases in reported usage from 2015This is likely due to actual decreased use (Window-Eyes has been discontinued), but may also be due to a narrower distribution of the survey and fewer respondents with low vision.</li> <li>When considering all screen readers used, JAWS was at 66% with NVDA just slightly lower at 64.9%.<br /> <img src="http://www.kanehsu.com/projects/screenreadersurvey7/media/SR-2.png" alt="Line chart of screen reader usage showing recent increases in usage of JAWS, NVDA, and VoiceOver, and significant decreases in Window-Eyes and ZoomText." style="max-width:650px"></li> <li>Narrator, which has seen significant recent improvements, was used as a primary screen reader by only .3% of respondentsHowever, 21.4% indicate that they &#8220;commonly use it&#8221;.</li> <li>Firefox (41%) surpassed Internet Explorer (31.4%) as the most common browser但是,最新版本的Firefox具有显着的屏幕阅读器兼容性问题,因此可能会发生变化值得注意的是,IE的使用率仍远高于整体人口Chrome usage (15.5% &#8211; a tripling of usage since 2015) also outpaced Safari usage (10.5%), with Edge usage being only .5%.<br /> <img src="http://www.kanehsu.com/projects/screenreadersurvey7/media/browsers.png" alt="Line chart of primary browser usage showing increases in Firefox and Chrome, decreases in Internet Explorer, and Safari usage generally stable since 2009.." style="max-width:650px"></li> <li>17.4% of survey responses were submitted via a mobile device</li> <li>Mobile screen reader usage was at a high of 88%, with iOS devices continuing to dominate.</li> <li>46% of respondents indicated that when performing common online tasks, such as banking or shopping, they are most likely to use a mobile appThis may reflect on the pervasiveness of mobile, or perhaps that web sites tend to be lacking in accessibility.</li> <li>41.4% of respondents always, often, or sometimes used a keyboard when using a mobile deviceThis emphasized the importance of keyboard accessibility for mobile apps and web content.</li> <li>The frequent use of landmarks and regions has continually decreased from 43.8% in January 2014, to 38.6% in July 2015, to 30.5% on this survey这种减少是相当令人不安的,特别是考虑到可访问性倡导者对这些要素的重视这可能是由于网页内容中缺少和滥用/过度使用地标/地区,或者标题和其他元素的导航可能是足够的Only 3.9% of respondents reported using landmarks/regions as the primary method for finding information on a lengthy web page.</li> <li>CAPTCHA remains by far the most problematic item reported by respondents&#8220;Screens or parts of screens that change unexpectedly&#8221; has seen a significant increase over the years and is now reported as the 2nd most problematic itemThis likely is due to the dynamic and complex nature of modern web pages and application.</li> </ul> <p>You can review the full survey results at <a href="http://www.kanehsu.com/projects/screenreadersurvey7/">http://www.kanehsu.com/projects/screenreadersurvey7/</a>As always, we&#8217;re very open to feedback and ideas for future surveys.</p> http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/survey7results/feed/ 新的全站点WAVE工具 http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/new-site-wide-wave-tools/ 2017年11月28日星期二23:11:18 +0000 杰瑞德史密斯 未分类 http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/ We&#8217;re happy to announce the release of several new options for using WAVE to evaluate pages across web sites虽然WAVE的强大之处在于促进对网页的深入手动分析,但这些新工具可让您轻松收集网站上任意数量网页的数据。WAVE Stand-alone API [&#8230;] <p><img src="https://wave.www.kanehsu.com/img/wavelogo.png" alt="WAVE Web Accessibility Evaluation Tool logo" style="float:right;margin:10px;" width="250" height="50" />We&#8217;re happy to announce the release of several new options for using <a href="http://wave.www.kanehsu.com/">WAVE</a> to evaluate pages across web sitesWhile the power of WAVE is in facilitating in-depth manual analysis of a web page, <a href="http://wave.www.kanehsu.com/sitewide">these new tools</a> allow you to easily collect data for any number of web pages on your sites.</p> <h2>WAVE Stand-alone API</h2> <p>While we have offered a <a href="https://wave.www.kanehsu.com/api">subscription WAVE API</a> for some time, this API has been updated and is now available for licensing as a <a href="https://wave.www.kanehsu.com/standalone">stand-alone, installable WAVE API engine package</a>This stand-alone API brings the power of WAVE inside your enterprise to allow fast, easy, and highly customizable checking of pages via your own servers.</p> <p><a href="https://wave.www.kanehsu.com/standalone">Learn more about the WAVE Stand-alone API</a></p> <h2>DinoLytics Accessibility &#8211; Powered by WAVE</h2> <p><img src="https://wave.www.kanehsu.com/img/dinolytics.png" alt="DinoLytics logo" style="float:right;margin:10px;width:250px" />WebAIM has partnered with <a href="https://pope.tech/">Pope Tech</a> to develop an enterprise level accessibility reporting system based on WAVEThe DinoLytics subscription-based service will provide powerful, economical tools, such as site spidering/crawling, platform organization and administration, custom dashboards, and more to give you the powerful data needed to put you in control of your accessibility efforts.</p> <p>Pope Tech is looking for initial partners to help drive the development and features of DinoLytics.</p> <p><a href="https://dinolytics.com/">Learn more about DinoLytics Accessibility</a></p> <h2>WAVE Runner</h2> <p>WAVE Runner allows you to very easily and inexpensively collect WAVE data about the accessibility of your web siteWAVE Runner delivers:</p> <ol> <li>A color-coded, sortable spreadsheet of all WAVE data for any number of site pages. <li>A 2-3 page analysis report of the WAVE data authored by one of WebAIM&#8217;s web accessibility experts. <li>Documentation for each data point identified by WAVE so you can begin to address site accessibility issues.</ol> <p>You get WAVE data AND a human analysis of that data AND powerful documentation—and with a guaranteed 5-day turnaroundPricing starts at $750 for up to 2500 pages.</p> <p><a href="https://wave.www.kanehsu.com/waverunner">Learn more about the WAVE Runner service</a></p> <h2>Future Plans</h2> <p>We&#8217;re excited about the future of WAVE! The <a href="https://wave.www.kanehsu.com/">online WAVE service</a> was used to evaluate over 2.5 million web pages in the last year我们刚刚达到了<a href="https://wave.www.kanehsu.com/extension"> WAVE Firefox和Chrome扩展程序</a>的100,000个活跃/每周用户These tools will always be provided freely as a 万博体育官网网址 service by WebAIM, while revenue from the site-wide tools will allow us to continue to improve and expand WAVE functionality.</p> <p>We are continually improving the WAVE evaluation logicWe&#8217;ll be giving the WAVE interface an update in the near futureWe&#8217;re working on a Edge browser extension正在开发利用订阅和独立API的开源工具As always, we&#8217;re very open to your feedback on how to make WAVE a more powerful and useful tool for improving web accessibility.</p> 屏幕阅读器和CSS:我们是否会走出风格(并进入内容)? http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/screen-readers-and-css/ http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/screen-readers-and-css/#comments 星期一,2017年8月28日20:40:56 +0000 约翰诺斯普 未分类 http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/ 开发人员经常会问各种CSS声明如何转换为屏幕阅读器体验Properties that are strictly visual &#8211; such as color, border, font, margin, padding &#8211; are transparent, but what about those that inject content, like ::before and ::after? What about properties that communicate meaning, like list-style and line-through? And then there are those [&#8230;] <p>开发人员经常会问各种CSS声明如何转换为屏幕阅读器体验Properties that are strictly visual &#8211; such as color, border, font, margin, padding &#8211; are transparent, but what about those that inject content, like <code>::before</code> and <code>::after</code>? What about properties that communicate meaning, like <code>list-style</code> and <code>line-through</code>? And then there are those that visually position or crop content, like <code>clip</code>, <code>position</code>, <code>display</code>, <code>overflow</code>, <code>height</code>, <code>width</code>, <code>visibility</code>&#8230; the list goes onWe all know that <a href="http://www.karlgroves.com/2013/08/26/css-generated-content-is-not-content/">using CSS to generate content is bad</a>, just as we all know that we should never ever exceed the speed limitIt happens.</p> <p>Earlier this year, three colleagues and I tested and documented the behavior of some widely-used CSS declarations in screen readers, leaving the screen reader user settings at their defaultsWe reported our findings at <a href="http://www.knowbility.org/education/accessu/">AccessU 2017</a> and will present again, with some new material added, at <a href="http://accessinghigherground.org/">Accessing Higher Ground</a>.</p> <p>In addition to myself, our team included CB Averitt and Steve Sawczyn of Deque, and Birkir GunnarssonWe tested the following screen reader-browser pairings:</p> <ul> <li>JAWS/IE 11</li> <li>JAWS/Chrome</li> <li>JAWS/Firefox</li> <li>NVDA/Firefox</li> <li>NVDA/Chrome</li> <li>VoiceOver/Safari</li> <li>VoiceOver/Mobile Safari</li> <li>Talkback/Mobile Chrome</li> </ul> <h2>Key Takeaways</h2> <h3>Different screen reader/browser pairings behave differently.</h3> <p>It&#8217;s tempting to assert that if you do <i>x</i>, &#8220;the screen reader&#8221; will announce <i>y</i>Sometimes it really is just that simple, but in a surprising number of situations, it just isn&#8217;t that absoluteFor example:</p> <ul> <li>Across the pairings we tested, <code>counter</code> was announced three different ways(CSS counters are &#8220;variables&#8221; maintained by CSS whose values can be incremented by CSS rules, to track how many times they are used.)</li> <li>Using <code>vertical-align:super</code> to communicate cents within a dollar amount worked in half of our pairingsIn the other half, $12<span style="vertical-align: super; font-size: 0.7em;">99</span> was announced as $1,299.</li> <li>Applying a transition to<code> opacity:0; visibility:hidden </code>on a paragraph, we logged five slightly different behaviors across the eight pairings.</li> </ul> <h3>DOM order is everything.</h3> <p>One of the consistencies we found is that, regardless of CSS position, content is read in the order that it appears in the DOMFor example, appending a <code>&lt;div&gt;</code> to the end of the <code>&lt;body&gt;</code> and then using <code>position:absolute</code> to boost it to the top of the viewport will not change the reading order in the screen reader &#8211; it will still come last (and in this case, we can safely say &#8220;the&#8221; screen reader).</p> <p>The same is true for floatsApplying <code>float:right</code> to an element typically positions it &#8220;after&#8221; (to the right of) the element that follows it in the DOM, making the visual reading order the opposite of the DOM orderSince the DOM order is what determines the screen reader reading order (and the tab order, in the case of active elements), the elements will be announced in the opposite order from the visual reading order.</p> <h3>Containers are only visual.</h3> <p>Many CSS properties are available to apply dimensions to containers &#8211; <code>height</code>, <code>width</code>, <code>max-height</code>, <code>max-width</code>, <code>clip</code> &#8211; and <code>overflow</code> and <code>text-overflow</code> determine whether and how content exceeding the bounds of the container are rendered在我们所有的测试配对中,所有这些都对屏幕阅读器是透明的无论内容是否被视觉剪切,或被<code> overflow:hidden </ code>遮挡,屏幕阅读器都会宣布容器中的所有内容Even <code>opacity:0</code> has no effect in the screen reader environment; the content is announced nonetheless.</p> <h2>The moral of the story</h2> <p>All of this really highlighted the value of accessibility-minded development and pre-launch testing &#8211; in a wide variety of browser-screen reader combinations &#8211; to ensure that all website visitors enjoy a consistent, equivalent experience.</p> <h2>For more information</h2> <p>This is just a brief overview of our findingsFor details, please check us out at <a href="http://accessinghigherground.org/">Accessing Higher Ground</a> in Westminster, Colorado on Friday, November 17, 2017 or contact <a href="mailto:john@www.kanehsu.com">john@www.kanehsu.com</a>.</p> http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/screen-readers-and-css/feed/ 14 To ARIA! The Cause of, and Solution to, All Our Accessibility Problems http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/aria-cause-solution/ http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/aria-cause-solution/#comments 2017年5月17日星期三17:31:51 +0000 乔恩怀廷 未分类 http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/ When WebAIM evaluates a client&#8217;s website for accessibility, we often spend more time evaluating and reporting on ARIA use than any other issue几乎我们撰写的每份报告都包括一个警告反对ARIA滥用的部分,并概述需要纠正的ARIA用途,或者最常被删除Ironically, this is often followed by a [&#8230;] <p>When WebAIM evaluates a client&#8217;s website for accessibility, we often spend more time evaluating and reporting on ARIA use than any other issue几乎我们撰写的每份报告都包括一个警告反对ARIA滥用的部分,并概述需要纠正的ARIA用途,或者最常被删除Ironically, this is often followed by a list of issues that can only be addressed with ARIA.</p> <p> Like many adults who were teenagers in the &#8217;90s, I can think of a Simpsons quote to fit just about any situationIn one popular episode, Homer holds up a mug of beer and proposes a toast &quot;To alcohol: the cause of, and solution to, all of life&#8217;s problems.&quot; With just a bit of tweaking, this quote represents my feelings about ARIA.</p> <p class="center"> <img src="http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/media/aria-toast.jpg" height="468" width="624" alt="To ARIA! The cause of, and solution to, all our accessibility problems." > </p> <p>Every ARIA role, state, or property can enhance accessibility when used correctly, and vice versaHowever, after looking at hundreds of real-world ARIA uses and abuses, it is clear that some ARIA attributes are typically used in ways that cause more problems than they solve, while other attributes should be used more often to solve specific problemsHere are a few of the most common ARIA attributes from each category:</p> <h2>The cause of&#8230;</h2> <p>Most problematic ARIA attributes share a similar problem&mdash;they are often used to override correct HTML semantics and thus present incorrect information or interactions to screen reader usersFor example:</p> <h3><code>role=&quot;menu&quot;</code></h3> <p>This is probably the worst offenderARIA <code> role =&quot; menu&quot; </ code>(或<code> menubar </ code>)不是页面顶部的简单链接集合它是一个类似软件的选项列表,其中箭头键用于导航菜单和子菜单Most of the &#8216;menus&#8217; that I encounter should probably be marked up with <code>&lt;nav&gt;</code> (or <code>role=&quot;navigation&quot;</code>), and nothing else.</p> <h3><code>role=&quot;grid&quot;</code></h3> <p>A grid should be navigated with the arrow keys, like a spreadsheet它不应该用在简单的数据表或使用Tab键导航的项目网格上Adding this role to a data table can render the table contents very in万博体育官网网址 to screen reader users.</p> <h3><code>role=&quot;toolbar&quot;</code></h3> <p>This is meant to be navigated with arrow keys, not the Tab key, and is reserved for complex application toolbars, not basic groups of links or buttonsThere seems to be a pattern here&#8230;</p> <h3><code>role=&quot;application&quot;</code></h3> <p>Like the previous three roles, this causes a Windows screen reader to switch from Read/Browse mode to Forms/Focus mode但是,除了非常复杂的小部件之外,很少需要高级键盘交互Most interactions can be addressed using native form controls or by using ARIA roles that have well-defined design patterns.</p> <h3><code>role=&quot;heading&quot;</code></h3> <p>A true heading (<code>&lt;h1&gt;</code>&#8211;<code>&lt;h6&gt;</code>) can almost always be used insteadIf this role is used correctly, it should also have an appropriate aria-level, but in the real world this is often missing.</p> <h3><code>role=&quot;alert&quot;</code></h3> <p>This should be used for important messages that should be read by a screen reader as soon as they appear如果正确实施,ARIA警报可能很有用,但警报可能出现的方式有很多种A few examples:</p> <ol> <li>A hidden element has <code>role=&quot;alert&quot;</code> applied when the page loads, so the screen reader reads the alert immediately (even if it is visually hidden) instead of reading it when it appears.</li> <li>Focus is set to the alert when it appears, so it is read twice (once because it is an alert and again because it has focus).</li> <li>ARIA alerts are triggered repeatedly, overwhelming a screen reader user.</li> </ol> <h3><code>role=&quot;button&quot;</code></h3> <p>When used correctly, it can tell a screen reader that an element functions like a button, but this role is often used extraneously (<code>&lt;button role=&quot;button&quot;&gt;</code>), or used where a true button should be used insteadI also see it used with elements that do not function as buttons例如,如果链接被赋予<code> role =&quot; button&quot; </ code>,JAWS将告诉用户使用空格键激活按钮,但链接只能通过Enter激活This would then require key event detection to ensure that pressing the Spacebar will activate the &quot;button&quot;.</p> <h3><code>aria-label</code></h3> <p>This can be an effective way to label form controls that don&#8217;t have text labels, or to provide alternative text for interactive elements that use icon fonts and CSS background images但是,<code> aria-label </ code>还可以覆盖其他重要信息,例如链接文本它经常被过度使用,或者只呈现特殊的屏幕阅读器信息,这会给屏幕阅读器用户带来不一致的体验此外,由于没有可视指示它正在使用中,因此在测试中经常被忽略I have seen countless examples where an ARIA label is just plain wrong.</p> <h2>The solution to&#8230;</h2> <p>There are some ARIA attributes that we often recommend be used more oftenMost of these fill a notable gap in HTML semantics.</p> <h3><code>aria-expanded</code></h3> <p>This can tell screen reader users that activating a button or link will cause content to expand and collapse below (e.g., an accordion), and also whether it is currently collapsed or expanded.</p> <h3><code>aria-haspopup</code></h3> <p>This attribute lets a screen reader user know that a button or link will cause something to pop upARIA 1.0声明这将与弹出的菜单和子菜单一起使用,我们绝对建议在这些情况下使用它It was often used for other types of pop-up, so ARIA 1.1 has expanded its use to include a few other pop-up types (most notably <code>aria-haspopup=&quot;dialog&quot;</code>), but its support is still limited.</p> <h3><code>aria-describedby</code></h3> <p>The <code>aria-describedby</code> attribute associates descriptions to form controls and other interactive elementsIt will not override the form label, link text, or alternative text, so when it is misapplied the impact is usually less significant.</p> <h3><code>aria-labelledby</code></h3> <p>This attribute can be used to provide multiple labels to a single form control, among other things它具有<code> aria-label </ code>的一些危险,就像重写链接文本一样However, since it is used with text that appears within the page, it is not abused nearly as often.</p> <h3><code>aria-pressed</code></h3> <p>This can be useful to identify the status of toggle buttons that can be pressed and unpressed, such as a mute button in a video player.</p> <h3><code>role=&quot;switch&quot;</code></h3> <p>Since on/off or toggle switches are becoming much more common on websites, ARIA 1.1 includes a new role to identify this type of interactionSupport is still inconsistent, but the fallback of a correctly-implemented ARIA switch should be a checkbox, which is an acceptable fallback until support improves.</p> <h3><code>role=&quot;presentation&quot;</code></h3> <p>This role will essentially remove the default semantics from an elementIt is useful in hiding layout tables from screen readers.</p> <h2>The cause of, and solution to&#8230;</h2> <p>I often find myself encouraging correct use and discouraging incorrect use of the following ARIA markup:</p> <h3><code>role=&quot;dialog&quot;</code></h3> <p>This attribute is going through some growing pains<a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria/roles#dialog">ARIA 1.0 gave a very specific definition for dialogs</a>Roughly paraphrasing, a dialog was defined as a window that interrupts a process and requires a response, but many people used this role for other types of dialogs outside the original scope<a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-1.1/#dialog">ARIA 1.1 has a broadened the definition for dialog</a>: &quot;A descendant window of the primary window of a web application.&quot; It also has new attributes of <code>aria-haspopup=&quot;dialog&quot;</code>, and <code>aria-modal=&quot;true&quot;</code> that can further enhance the accessibility of dialogs但是,仍然缺乏对这些新属性的支持,<code> role =&quot; dialog&quot; </ code>的当前实现可能会令人困惑和不一致它还会导致NVDA屏幕阅读器出现阅读问题(尽管将来会发生变化)For that reason, I struggle with the best use of this role, and our recommendations can vary based on the implementation and timelines of specific clients.</p> <h3><code>role=&quot;tablist&quot;</code></h3> <p>A group of tabs can present a great deal of important information: selecting a tab will change the section of content that follows, which tab is currently selected, how many tabs are available, etcARIA tabs present this same information to screen reader users when implemented correctly, but they cause more problems than they solve if they are implemented incorrectly or incompletely.</p> <h3><code>tabindex=&quot;0&quot;</code></h3> <p>While <code>tabindex</code> is not technically an ARIA attribute, it goes hand-in-hand with ARIAUsed correctly, it allows elements that are not &quot;focusable&quot; (e.g., <code>&lt;div&gt;</code>s) to receive keyboard focusWhen implemented, additional techniques are necessary, such as giving the element an appropriate role and using scripting to trigger the element&#8217;s functionality when Enter and/or Space key events are detected但是,<code> tabindex =&quot; 0&quot; </ code>通常与不“可操作”的元素一起使用,这意味着用户可以使用键盘导航到它但不能与元素交互For example, important instructions in a form may be given <code>tabindex=&quot;0&quot;</code> so that a screen reader user will discover them while navigating with the Tab key, but a better technique may be to associate these instructions to a form control with aria-describedby, or to restructure the form so the instructions are presented at the beginning.</p> <h3><code>tabindex=&quot;-1&quot;</code></h3> <p>This can be used to set &quot;programmatic&quot; focus to something that otherwise cannot receive focus, meaning the user will skip over it when pressing the Tab key, but focus can be set to it through scripting or a linkThis is sometimes used without consideration that a link or control with <code>tabindex=&quot;-1&quot;</code> will no longer be keyboard 万博体育官网网址.</p> <h3>Landmarks and HTML5 regions</h3> <p>These can enhance orientation and navigation when used appropriatelyAt the very least, most sites should have a <code>&lt;header&gt;</code>, <code>&lt;nav&gt;</code>, <code>&lt;main&gt;</code>, and <code>&lt;footer&gt;</code>使用不正确或过度(通常是),地标比帮助产生更多的噪音Two regions/landmarks that are also often overused are: <code>&lt;nav&gt;</code>/<code>role=&quot;navigation&quot;</code> and <code>&lt;header&gt;</code> (the ARIA equivalent&mdash;<code>role=&quot;banner&quot;</code>&mdash;does not seem to be overused as often as <code>&lt;header&gt;</code>).</p> <h2>ARIA Design Patterns to the rescue</h2> <p>If you are in doubt regarding the appropriate implementation of ARIA, the first place to look is the <a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-practices/">WAI-ARIA Authoring Practices</a> document, especially the section on <a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-practices/#aria_ex">Design Patterns and Widgets</a>本节概述了20多种常见ARIA小部件的正确模式Each widget has the following information.</p> <ol> <li>A description of the correct widget typeDoes the element that you are creating match the widget description in this section? If it does not, maybe you should be using different ARIA attributes, or no ARIA at allOr maybe you should change the widget you are building so it aligns with the definition.</li> <li>Keyboard interaction本节将识别必需和可选的击键例如,如果要创建滑块,则用户必须能够使用向上/向下<em>和</ em>左/右箭头键增加和减少该值,而不是一组或另一组Home和End键还必须将滑块值设置为开头和结尾Page Up/Page Down may optionally be programmed to jump by a larger value (e.g., by 10).</li> <li>The correct ARIA roles, states, and properties与键盘控件一样,它将识别窗口小部件的必需和可选ARIA属性For example, a slider needs roles of <code>slider</code>, <code>aria-valuenow</code>, <code>aria-valuemin</code>, and <code>aria-valuemax</code>某些滑块可能需要其他值,例如<code> aria-valuetext </ code>和<code> aria-orientation </ code>A label will also need to be provided through <code>aria-labelledby</code> or <code>aria-label</code>.</li> <li>Examples对于许多但不是所有小部件,提供了工作示例Unfortunately, there are many incorrect ARIA examples found online, so it is often best to start with the examples provided in the <a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-practices/">WAI-ARIA Authoring Practices</a> document. </li> </ol> <p>If a developer would refer to this document before adding ARIA to their pages, many ARIA accessibility problems could be avoided, and ARIA solutions would increase.</p> http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/aria-cause-solution/feed/ 1 Feedback on WCAG 2.1 Draft http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/wcag-2-1-feedback/ http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/wcag-2-1-feedback/#comments 2017年3月31日星期五20:18:03 +0000 杰瑞德史密斯 未分类 http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/ 概述以下是对WCAG 2.1第一次公开工作草案的反馈WebAIM目前支持采用其中5个成功标准(有一些建议的改进)A few others would be supported (with clarifications and improvements), but not at the conformance level currently proposedWebAIM does not support, opposes, or strongly [&#8230;] <h2>Overview</h2> <p>The following is feedback on the <a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-WCAG21-20170228/">First Public Working Draft of WCAG 2.1</a>WebAIM目前支持采用其中5个成功标准(有一些建议的改进)A few others would be supported (with clarifications and improvements), but not at the conformance level currently proposedWebAIM does not support, opposes, or strongly opposes adoption of the majority of the proposed success criteria as drafted.</p> <p><strong>Our lack of support of a success criterion does not mean that we are opposed to the principles or recommendations provided, but instead simply indicates that we believe it is not currently viable for inclusion in WCAG.</strong></p> <p>We applaud the efforts of the working group on the progress they&#8217;ve made, but serious consideration of the current state and future direction of WCAG 2.1 is warranted if it is to become a successful and widely adopted W3C Recommendation.</p> <p>Many of the draft success criteria are very difficult to understand, some bordering on unintelligible这特别(并且具有讽刺意味)适用于旨在解决认知可及性问题的成功标准There is little chance that most of these success criteria would be understood or accepted by a broader audience as currently proposed.</p> <p>Additionally, many of the success criteria are not testable, conflict with existing success criteria, do not meet WCAG&#8217;s own requirements for inclusion, or simply would not possibly be adopted by web authors in general提议的成功标准中的17个是A,11是AA,没有一个是AAAThe severity of many of these success criteria are proposed at too high a level to likely be supported by authors or standards bodies.</p> <h2>Foundational WCAG 2.0 issues are not addressed</h2> <p>A premise of the 2.1 updates is that the existing 2.0 success criteria finalized in 2008 would not be modified虽然我们理解对向后兼容性的渴望,但令人失望的是没有尝试更实质性的更新本草案中未涉及<a href="http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/wcag-next/"> WCAG 2.0发布5年前记录的WebAIM </a>我们强烈建议工作组重新考虑解决现有成功标准的差距和不足之处We believe such changes will be necessary to resolve many of the concerns documented below.</p> <p>Another primary concern is that some WCAG 2.1 success criteria would essentially invalidate existing success criteria by introducing more extensive requirements for conformance (and often at higher levels) than are present at 2.0除非删除或更新无效的2.0成功标准以反映2.1要求,否则这肯定会引起很多混淆As an example, by requiring 400% text sizing at Level A, the current 200% text sizing success criteria at AA would become moot, so therefore must be removed to avoid confusion.</p> <h2><a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-WCAG21-20170228/#support-personalization-minimum">SC 1.3.4 &#8211; Support Personalization (Minimum)</a></h2> <p>While the premise of this Success Criteria (SC) is to ensure that visual presentation is identified via underlying semantics (something already required under 1.3.1, etc.) to allow customization, it additionally requires author inclusion of specific customization via author-settable properties and attributes that do not yet fully existBecause WCAG techniques ought not be normative, and because these techniques are not yet available in ARIA or other standardized, accessibility-supported ways, this would thus require significant author modifications or customization options to bring otherwise conformant content into WCAG 2.1 Level A conformance.</p> <p>WebAIM does not support the adoption of this SC as drafted.</p> <h2><a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-WCAG21-20170228/#linearization">SC 1.4.10 &#8211; Linearization</a></h2> <p>Reflowing content into a single column provides numerous benefitsThis SC should, however, be clarified to refer to <em>not inhibiting reflow</em> based on user customization of your content rather than suggesting that authors must provide &#8220;a mechanism&#8221; for reflowing content, such as a &#8220;Linearize page&#8221; control on each web page.</p> <p>Additionally, this SC should be scoped to primarily apply to <em>text content</em>, and generally longer blocks of text at thatIf applied to other types of content, such as horizontally oriented toolbars, tree widgets, etc., this would require significant author effort and would result in non-standard presentations that would most often be less 万博体育官网网址.</p> <p>Some clarification of the overlaps of Linearization and text sizing may be necessaryIs single-column reflow also required at 400% text sizing without horizontal scrolling?</p> <p>WebAIM supports the premise of this SC, but does not support adoption of this SC as drafted.</p> <h2><a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-WCAG21-20170228/#resize-content">SC 1.4.11 &#8211; Resize content</a></h2> <p>A primary concern is that this Level A success criterion requires 400% text sizing which would invalidate the existing 1.4.4 Level AA success criterion which requires 200% text sizingThis would cause confusion as to why a Level AA SC requires a lower threshold for sizing than a new Level A SC.</p> <p>Meeting this SC will require significant effort by many web authorsFew popular sites tested come close to meeting the 400% sizing threshold.</p> <p>WebAIM suggests a more practical approach &#8211; perhaps 200% text sizing with minimal horizontal scrolling (perhaps double the viewport width) at Level A, 400% text sizing with minimal horizontal scrolling (perhaps double the viewport width) at Level AA, and the draft SC as proposed at Level AAA.</p> <p>It is hoped that the working group will also address content loss for true text sizing (i.e., not zooming the page, but only increasing text size) to a reasonable level &#8211; perhaps 150%This and the existing Resize Text SC generally neglect this audience which <a href="http://www.kanehsu.com/projects/lowvisionsurvey/#at">represents 38% of respondents to the WebAIM Survey of Users with Low Vision</a>.</p> <h2><a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-WCAG21-20170228/#graphics-contrast">SC 1.4.12 &#8211; Graphics Contrast</a></h2> <p>We believe additional clarification and research is needed regarding the relevance of the current WCAG-defined contrast requirements to modern displays and users这些WCAG公式和对比度阈值主要基于2001年在Amiga 1000显示器上进行的研究从那时起,显示技术和用户熟练程度肯定发生了显着变化,但很少有人质疑这项研究对现代网络的适用性WebAIM will soon be conducting research into human perception of contrasts and mapping this user data to the WCAG thresholds to provide some insight into these questions.</p> <p>As with the existing text contrast success criteria, additional clarity is needed to define testability of contrast with gradient backgrounds, text (or, in this case, graphical element) borders/shadows, &#8216;busy&#8217; backgrounds, etcThe 4.5:1 threshold would result in very limited color options in many designs.</p> <p>WebAIM highly welcomes the addition of a contrast requirement for graphical content, but additional clarity and scope is needed for this success criterion to be viable.</p> <h2><a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-WCAG21-20170228/#printing">SC 1.4.13 &#8211; Printing</a></h2> <p>The ability (or lack thereof) of user agents to properly apply user magnification to printed documents should not be the author&#8217;s responsibility这一成功标准远远超出了WCAG的范围This SC would essentially require authors to become familiar with user agent print deficiencies and bugs, and force them to apply user agent specific <code>@media print</code> styles to address these.</p> <p>WebAIM opposes the adoption of this SC as drafted.</p> <h2><a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-WCAG21-20170228/#user-interface-component-contrast-minimum">SC 1.4.14 &#8211; User Interface Component Contrast (Minimum)</a></h2> <p>This SC is very difficult to understand as written目前尚不清楚需要测量哪些组件与哪些组件相对应需要进一步澄清Despite the current lack of clarity, addition of contrast requirements for indicating user interaction states for elements is very welcome.</p> <h2><a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-WCAG21-20170228/#adapting-text">SC 1.4.15 &#8211; Adapting Text</a></h2> <p>As the many GitHub comments indicate, this success criterion is very problematic as written, but notable improvements have been suggestedWe generally agree with <a href="https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/78#issuecomment-290532869">David&#8217;s suggested wording here</a>, with two exceptions&#8230;</p> <p>First, it should be clarified that &#8220;text styles of the page can be overridden <strong>by the user</strong>&#8230;&#8221;Exclusion of this language or inclusion of the &#8220;a mechanism is provided&#8230;&#8221; text will invariably result in authors believing that this requires them to provide the functionality via an in-page widget or user preference when this is not (we believe) the intent.</p> <p>Second, user overrides of &#8220;font family&#8221; opens up too many variables for testing and should thus be removedWhat if the font characters in the user-specified font are significantly disproportionate to the author-supplied characters in size, shape, etc.? The variations introduced by font family customization are, we believe, adequately covered by the manipulation of line, letter, and word spacingThe only other possibility to ensure consistent testability is to define a specific font face (e.g., Verdana) which introduces other notable difficulties.</p> <p>WebAIM supports the general concept of this success criterion, but additional clarification and consideration is needed in order for it to be viable.</p> <h2><a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-WCAG21-20170228/#popup-interference">SC 1.4.16 &#8211; Popup Interference</a></h2> <p>It&#8217;s difficult to comment on this success criterion because the <a href="https://github.com/w3c/wcag21/issues/75">descriptions and scenarios presented for it</a> do not at all match the success criterion textIt is entirely unclear what the intention of this SC even is, but I&#8217;ll attempt to address some of the issues as we understand them.</p> <p>The SC language clearly exempts user agent rendering of title text, yet the descriptions and examples refer specifically and almost exclusively to user agent rendering of title textBecause title text rendering is primarily controlled by the user agent, we believe title attribute presentation should not be covered by this SC.</p> <p>The descriptions refer to enlarged mouse cursors obscuring &#8216;tooltip&#8217; content and describe allowing multiple mechanisms for triggering the &#8216;tooltip&#8217; content (this is already partially covered by keyboard guidelines), but the SC text addresses neither of theseThere&#8217;s clearly an editorial disconnect here.</p> <p>Presuming that the SC is actually regarding &#8216;tooltip&#8217; content obscuring triggering content (e.g., a tooltip for a link obscures the link text), this is primarily handled by the user agent <em>or</em> does not seem to be a disability-specific issue, but a general usability and design consideration that does not have place in accessibility guidelines如果没有人能够看到触发内容,那么残障用户就没有不同的体验It also is unreasonable to require that authors provide a mechanism to turn off tooltip content when this interaction model may be necessary and is otherwise conformant.</p> <p>WebAIM does not support the adoption of this SC as drafted.</p> <h2><a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-WCAG21-20170228/#speech-input">SC 2.1.4 &#8211; Speech Input</a></h2> <p>&#8220;All functionality of the content does not obstruct&#8230;&#8221; is difficult to understand and measureSuggested rewording &#8211; &#8220;Commands that can be triggered via speech input are not obstructed by author-defined functionality.&#8221;</p> <p>This success criterion presents two scenariosThe first is when a user speaks a word that matches a functional element on the page, and the speech control software triggers that functional element without user&#8217;s intending to do soAssuming that speech control actually worked this way (my experience has been that triggering functionality requires additional speech activation, such as speaking &#8220;Click Products&#8221; rather than simply &#8220;Products&#8221;), the only way to avoid this conflict would be for authors to either <em>not provide functional elements or not use words to define them</em>这显然是站不住脚的This is an obscure user agent issue that should not be of concern to authors.</p> <p>The other scenario presents a situation where a button that visually presents the text &#8220;Submit&#8221; is not identified with this text semantically, thus causing the voice control user to not know how to activate this control2.0中的其他成功标准略微涵盖了这种情况,但这个提议的SC文本根本没有涵盖Restructuring this SC to address this issue would be a welcome improvement &#8211; perhaps &#8220;Interface controls have programmatically determined text that matches or is equivalent to the visually presented text or functionality of that control&#8221;&#8230; or similar.</p> <p>WebAIM does not support the adoption of this SC as drafted.</p> <h2><a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-WCAG21-20170228/#timeouts">SC 2.2.6 &#8211; Timeouts</a></h2> <p>This Level A success criterion is generally untestableThere&#8217;s no way to objectively measure &#8220;easily return&#8221;, &#8220;simple action&#8221;, or &#8220;simple, understandable language&#8221;This also omits obvious exceptions where time limits are essential or unavoidable.</p> <p>It is not reasonable or appropriate to ask authors to record all user actions and states (presumably even client-side ones), and then provide seamless loss of data for users that abandon and then return to an activity up to a week laterThere are many instances where the user states cannot possibly be trackedIn many instances, such tracking would be unethical and illegal &#8211; the example scenario suggests that a travel site must store <em>and then re-present</em> a user&#8217;s credit card number after a week, even without user permission to do so.</p> <p>The requirement to inform the user ahead of time would seemingly necessitate lengthy and confusing informative messages on all pages that have timed components &#8211; &#8220;Your session will time out in 20 minutesYou will have a five minute warning period before you are logged out and will have 120 seconds to respond to this warning message.&#8221; The complexity of such a warning may introduce more difficulty and overhead than the timeout itself.</p> <p>The primary issues introduced by timeouts are already generally addressed via the existing 2.1.1 SC (Level A).</p> <p>WebAIM does not support the adoption of this SC as drafted, but may support a clarified and improved version at Level AAA.</p> <h2><a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-WCAG21-20170228/#animation-from-interactions">SC 2.2.7 &#8211; Animation from interactions</a></h2> <p>The impetus for this SC is to address vestibular issues (e.g., dizziness or nausea) associated with parallax scrolling (simultaneous foreground and background scrolling in different directions or at different speeds), but the language does not make it clear that scrolling is &#8220;a user action&#8221;Clarity is needed.</p> <p>This SC prescribes explicit thresholds (1/3 of the viewport and 3 seconds) with no clear data to back up the impacts of these particular valuesWhile triggering vestibular disorders is certainly impactful to users, quality user research is needed to provide justifications for a Level A SC that would have notable impact on web/mobile design and user interaction.</p> <p>This success criterion would render many common and often useful interaction models non-conformant &#8211; such as swipe animations on mobile, pop-up menu animation, focus scrolling, etc.</p> <p>WebAIM would support the adoption of a clarified/improved version of this SC, but likely at Level AA or AAA unless additional, definitive research suggests a clear mapping of the defined thresholds to significant user impact.</p> <h2><a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-WCAG21-20170228/#interruptions-minimum">SC 2.2.8 &#8211; Interruptions (minimum)</a></h2> <p>This success criterion is at odds with 2.2.1 and 2.2.6 which prescribe pop-ups and notifications to inform of time-outs它还与新的SC 3.2.8(内容更改)冲突,后者要求向用户通知内容更改How can authors inform users of a time-out or content change to meet one success criterion when such notifications are disallowed by another?</p> <p>&#8220;Interruptions&#8221; is not clearly definedAre dynamic form validation messages (such as slightly delayed indications of an unavailable username) &#8220;interruptions&#8221;? Auto-complete suggestions? Chat messages or new e-mail notifications that are a core function of an application? In cases where interruptions are important, but not an &#8220;emergency&#8221;, critical functionality could be lost, thus resulting in notable negative impact on the user experience.</p> <p>Until standard mechanisms are available for client-side control over such interruptions, the only mechanism for meeting this success criterion is via a user control, which itself introduces cognitive load and comes at notable author effortThis would be at odds with important and critical messaging systems in modern web applications.</p> <p>WebAIM would support adoption of this SC, but only at Level AAA.</p> <h2><a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-WCAG21-20170228/#single-key-shortcuts">SC 2.4.11 &#8211; Single-key Shortcuts</a></h2> <p>The explanation of the success criterion indicates that it is intended to stop conflicts with voice control software triggering single-key shortcuts in a page这似乎明显属于语音控制用户代理的区域,以区分听写输入和用户控制的激活If voice control software triggers an &#8220;A&#8221; shortcut anytime this letter or a word containing this letter is voiced (at least not without a qualifier &#8211; &#8220;Click A&#8221;), this clearly is a user agent deficiency, not an authoring issue.</p> <p>However, the SC language (&#8220;Single-character shortcuts are not the only way activate a control, unless&#8230;&#8221;) does not generally help in this scenario at all &#8211; an author simply needs to provide an additional &#8220;way&#8221; for the user to get this functionalityFor example, the presented scenario of &#8220;Y&#8221; triggering Gmail&#8217;s &#8220;archive message&#8221; functionality would never be a failure because additional interface options are available to perform this functionality (e.g., an &#8220;Archive Message&#8221; interface button)It would be relatively rare for authors to rely <em>entirely</em> on a shortcut key to trigger such functionality.</p> <p>This SC should additionally be clarified to only apply to author-defined shortcuts, and not to user-agent shortcuts并且仅限于字母数字快捷键,而不是Esc(关闭菜单/对话框)或空格(触发复选框),例如Otherwise this would cause authors to override user-agent functionality, such as creating a custom select input because the browser otherwise provides single-key functionality (e.g., hitting &#8220;U&#8221; on a State select menu jumps to &#8220;Utah&#8221;)This could also be interpreted to prohibit auto-complete functionality (for example) which provides varying controls/options with each individual key press.</p> <p>This SC also discourages the use of single-key shortcuts which can be extremely useful for many other users with disabilities, primarily users with visual or motor disabilities that rely on efficient keyboard interactionsIt would be very atypical for a Level A SC to discourage a technique that provides long-standing, accessibility-supported functionality for many users in order to address the needs of a small audience of users in an extremely narrow scope of applicability &#8211; when users with voice control software (that is incapable of differentiating user input from activation of user controls) errantly voice a command that matches a single-key short defined in an application that doesn&#8217;t have an alternative for that functionality or an option to customize or disable that shortcutThis seems more suited for AAA or as an advisory technique.</p> <p>WebAIM does not support the adoption of this SC as drafted, but may support a clarified and improved version at Level AAA.</p> <h2><a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-WCAG21-20170228/#target-size">SC 2.5.1 &#8211; Target Size</a></h2> <p>The term &#8220;target&#8221; should clarify that this applies to the interactive area of a user activated link or control这个词目前相当模糊&#8220;Primary purpose or function&#8221; is also vague and difficult to measure.</p> <p>An exception is defined for when the link/control &#8220;has an alternative link/control whose target does meet the minimum size requirements.&#8221; Consider a superscript single character link to a footnote section at the bottom of a page对于这个SC来说,这将是一个非常普遍的失败这个脚注内容很容易通过滚动浏览器来实现While not as easy as a suitably-sized target for the link, this would, we believe, be more useful than requiring the author to provide &#8220;an alternative link/control&#8221; on the same page that does meet this size requirementConsideration should be made for in-page content that is already 万博体育官网网址 without activating the control.</p> <p>Because much existing conformant web content would become non-conformant upon adoption of this SC as written, WebAIM supports adoption of this SC at Level AA with additional clarifications as noted above.</p> <h2><a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-WCAG21-20170228/#pointer-inputs-with-additional-sensors">SC 2.5.2 &#8211; Pointer inputs with additional sensors</a></h2> <p>An exception should be added for when additional pointer sensor information is critical to the functionalityWebAIM otherwise supports adoption of this SC as drafted.</p> <h2><a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-WCAG21-20170228/#touch-with-assistive-technology">SC 2.5.3 &#8211; Touch with Assistive Technology</a></h2> <p>This requires that authors not introduce functionality that conflicts with screen reader overrides of touch events (or that they provide an alternative mechanism, such as &#8220;a mobile menu button&#8221;)主要困难在于,无数当前且尚未定义的屏幕阅读器触摸事件是作者无法完全测试或考虑的因此,该SC似乎基本上要求不使用触摸事件或总是提供替代机制We don&#8217;t believe this is the intent.</p> <p>It seems that this is primarily a user agent issue &#8211; they should allow users the ability to specify whether touch events are handled by the assistive technology or are passed to the platform (as is the case with key events in Windows screen readers).</p> <p>It&#8217;s likely we are misinterpreting an aspect of this SC, but it does not seem viable for inclusion in WCAG.</p> <h2><a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-WCAG21-20170228/#pointer-gestures">SC 2.5.4 &#8211; Pointer Gestures</a></h2> <p>For touch interfaces, because 2.5.3 (above) seemingly requires alternative mechanisms (such as a &#8220;a mobile menu button&#8221;) for all simple pointer gestures (and, presumably, all complex ones too), this seems to be a moot requirement if 2.5.3 stands as isWhy would an author provide a simple gesture alternative for a complex gesture when both the simple and complex gestures require a standard button alternative? Or perhaps we&#8217;re misinterpreting all of this.</p> <p>This would have a notable impact on many standard and (potentially) otherwise conformant interfaces, such as Google Maps, many mobile interfaces, etcWebAIM supports the general intent of this success criterion, but it seems best aligned with Level AA.</p> <h2><a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-WCAG21-20170228/#device-sensors">SC 2.6.1 &#8211; Device Sensors</a></h2> <p>WebAIM supports adoption of this SC as drafted.</p> <h2><a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-WCAG21-20170228/#orientation">SC 2.6.2 &#8211; Orientation</a></h2> <p>This success criterion also seems to be primarily focused on user agent flexibility, not on authoring practices用户通常无法完全限制<em> Web内容</ em>的设备方向And if this is or were made possible, would it not be incumbent on the user agent to allow end user override or customization of this (just as they should allow resizing of pixel-defined text, pinch-to-zoom functionality, etc.)?</p> <p>The problem that is being addressed by this success criteria is either generally non-existent for web content, or needs to be clarified so authors understand what techniques to avoid.</p> <h2><a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-WCAG21-20170228/#plain-language-minimum">SC 3.1.7 &#8211; Plain Language</a></h2> <p>This success criterion has the following issues:</p> <ul> <li>It is nearly impossible to test due to high levels of subjectivity and an inability to measure to the vague terms and definitions provided.</li> <li>It is confusing and (ironically) does not meet its own requirements for plain or concrete language</li> <li>It is not applicable to a wide array of web content</li> <li>Many of the requirements seem arbitrarily defined and lacking in research-based evidence (e.g., why 1500 most common words as a maximum?)</li> <li>How would the 1500 most common words be defined in a way that is accurately testable? Would these be defined in normative WCAG for all languages? If not, the changes to external lists of common words would cause the conformance of content to be subject to changes in language usage over timeThis would require significant and frequent testing to determine if all words used are still on the &#8220;common&#8221; list.</li> <li>It relies on mechanisms for user-defined content customization (such as automatically replacing non-literal text with a literal alternative) that do not yet existIn absence of such techniques, authors must then provide very onerous mechanisms to provide such alternatives programmatically (and these controls would themselves be inherently complex for users to parse).</li> <li>It imposes editorial and content restrictions that extend well beyond the scope of WCAG, particularly for Level A conformance</li> </ul> <p>While clearly well-intentioned (many of these <strong>best practices</strong> would certainly do much to improve understandability for many users), this success criterion is too rigid, too restrictive, and too subjective to be reasonably applied by authors to the majority of web content.</p> <p>WebAIM does not support the adoption of this SC as drafted.</p> <h2><a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-WCAG21-20170228/#manageable-blocks">SC 3.1.8 &#8211; Manageable Blocks</a></h2> <p>Like 3.1.7, this success criterion may not be applicable to many instances of content它似乎过于严格,难以理解和测试需要对这些定义的阈值进行额外的研究Does this apply to verbal/auditory &#8220;statements&#8221; as well as text &#8220;statements&#8221;?</p> <p>WebAIM supports adoption of this SC, but only at Level AAA.</p> <h2><a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-WCAG21-20170228/#extra-symbols">SC 3.1.9 &#8211; Extra Symbols</a></h2> <p>While adding symbols at the beginning of critical controls may be helpful for some users, it would certainly increase cognitive load and difficulty for many other users, particularly in areas where related or generally understood symbols are not available for that critical functionality.</p> <p>Terms such as &#8220;which relates to the topic&#8221;, &#8220;significant financial loss&#8221;, &#8220;deterioration in a patient&#8217;s condition or effective loss of rights&#8221;, &#8220;safety, risks, privacy, health or opportunities&#8221;, etcare very subjective and unmeasurable.</p> <p>WebAIM does not support the adoption of this SC as drafted, but may support an alternative at Level AAA that adequately addresses these concerns.</p> <h2><a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-WCAG21-20170228/#accidental-activation">SC 3.2.6 &#8211; Accidental Activation</a></h2> <p>Additional clarification of &#8220;single-pointer activation&#8221; is warranted, otherwise WebAIM supports adoption of this success criterion, though it seems best aligned with Level AA.</p> <h2><a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-WCAG21-20170228/#familiar-design-minimum">SC 3.2.7 &#8211; Familiar Design (Minimum)</a></h2> <p>It&#8217;s difficult to comment on this success criterion because it is mostly unintelligible and untestable.</p> <p>How does one measure &#8220;easily identifiable and available&#8221;? This is not defined.</p> <p>Why were only &#8220;help, navigation to help, and search forms&#8221; identified for this design requirement? Is this based on research?</p> <p>Does this require that all pages provide these three items? Or does this only apply in cases where these are already present?</p> <p>How can a &#8220;platform specific user interface design&#8221; apply to web content which is, by its nature, not platform specific? How would an author know what these design patterns are (short of defining them all in normative content)? When platform specific design patterns change, does content that was previous conformant suddenly become non-conformant?</p> <p>Measuring whether a &#8220;design was used successfully by users in a prior version&#8221; may not be possible to authors lacking access to a time machineWhy would success in a prior version be relevant to success in the current version? How would an author know that a user needs the fall-back to the prior version short of the user indicating this? Or must the fall-back always be provided (thus making it the primary version, not a fall-back)? Providing a fall-back to a prior &#8220;successful&#8221; version for only these critical elements would likely violate 3.2.4 which requires consistent identification of such items</p> <p>If understood correctly, this would prescribe very specific and rigid design constraints for what are often (by nature of usability) the most prevalent and important items within web content and applications.</p> <p>WebAIM strongly opposes the adoption of this SC as drafted.</p> <h2><a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-WCAG21-20170228/#change-of-content">SC 3.2.8 &#8211; Change of Content</a></h2> <p>This SC is generally supported by WebAIMIt is, however, unclear how the &#8220;5 notifications per minute&#8221; exemption appliesBecause these notifications would generally be triggered by user activation, if the interface allows more than 5 activations per minute, does this success criterion no longer apply? Because one can&#8217;t generally control the number of user activations, how is this testable?</p> <p>Or is this suggesting that after 5 notifications in a minute that the author can disable the notification and still be conformant? In this case, can the notifications be disabled from thenceforth, or must they be re-enabled as soon as the &#8220;5 per minute&#8221; threshold no longer is applicable (e.g., no longer than 1 minute after the last activation)?</p> <p>Or is this only intended for notifications that are not user activated, such as an interface that updates content automatically more than 5 times per minute? Clarification on this exemption is needed.</p> <p>As an editorial note, the definition of &#8220;Programmatic notification&#8221; is not linked from the success criterion.</p> <p>Assuming clarification of the above, WebAIM supports adoption of this success criterion.</p> <h2><a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-WCAG21-20170228/#minimize-user-errors">SC 3.3.7 &#8211; Minimize user errors</a></h2> <p>This necessitates manipulation of user-entered data in ways that could violate data integrity and usability (e.g., a potential failure of 3.2.2 On Input &#8211; Level A).</p> <p>As stated in the <a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-WCAG21-20170228/#dfn-common-input-error">Editor&#8217;s Note</a>, &#8220;common input error&#8221; needs additional clarity without relying on non-normative content.</p> <p>Errors &#8220;that have been reported or documented more then <em>[sic]</em> one time&#8221; is unmeasurable这也将创建一种场景,通过简单地由报告错误的用户可以立即使符合内容不符合要求How is a &#8220;report&#8221; defined or measured?</p> <p>&#8220;&#8230;and there is a known way to identify them&#8221;Known to whom and in what ways?</p> <p>Interpretations of &#8220;where the corrections can be reliably made&#8221; would vary greatly and would certainly be contextually, culturally, and technologically dependent.</p> <p>WebAIM opposes the adoption of this SC as drafted.</p> <h2><a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-WCAG21-20170228/#undo">SC 3.3.8 &#8211; Undo</a></h2> <p>&#8220;Users are provided with the ability&#8230;&#8221; Does this require author-supplied mechanisms? Is the Back button sufficient?</p> <p>&#8220;Clearly labeled&#8221; is subjective and unmeasurable&#8220;&#8230; get back to the place they were at&#8221; is ambiguousWhich place? For how long after the action must the user be able to undo and be returned to &#8220;the place&#8221;? Must a vendor allow a user to &#8220;undo&#8221; a financial transaction?</p> <p>&#8220;&#8230; unwanted loss of data&#8221; is subjective to the user, not to the author, and is thus unmeasurable.</p> <p>This proposed Level A SC would generally render existing 3.3.4 (Level AA) and 3.3.6 (Level AAA) regarding Error Prevention moot because this would require a significantly higher level of error recovery.</p> <p>Barring significant changes and clarifications, WebAIM strongly opposes the adoption of this SC as drafted.</p> <h2><a href="https://www.w3.org/TR/2017/WD-WCAG21-20170228/#provide-support">SC 3.3.9 &#8211; Provide Support</a></h2> <p>&#8220;Content is provided that helps users understand&#8230;&#8221;仅这一点就使得这个SC无法控制What types of content? How is this content provided? How can one measure whether content helps or does not help user understanding? How much must it help? Which users?</p> <p>Are there examples of types of &#8220;content&#8221; that should be provided to help users understand &#8220;forms&#8221;?</p> <p>Is there some research-based metric for defining &#8220;long documents&#8221; as over 300 words? How would providing additional content always aid in understanding content that is already &#8220;too long&#8221;?</p> <p>Requiring additional content would increase cognitive load and could decrease understandability for some users with cognitive or learning disabilitiesWCAG success criteria that pose such potential conflicts are typically defined at Level AAA.</p> <p>While well-intentioned and intended to provide best practice guidance, this success criterion is confusing, untestable, and untenable for most web contentWebAIM反对采用这个SC作为草案。</ p> http://www.kanehsu.com/blog/wcag-2-1-feedback/feed/ 2