Added assumption for SC3-1-2-lang-valid #413
Conversation
Based on discussion in #348
Brynanders
added
reviewer wanted
Rule
|
We discussed in #348 if the language attribute was applied to a single word, if that was a WCAG violation. With the now added assumption, we cover both this case and also cases where a part of the content has been marked up with an incorrect language attribute, but where a language attribute is not needed at all because the language of the part is the same as the language of the whole page. |
Brynanders
requested review from
jeeyyy,
audreymaniez and
carlosapaduarte
and removed request for
carlosapaduarte
_rules/SC3-1-2-lang-valid.md
Outdated
| @@ -27,7 +27,7 @@ The `lang` and `xml:lang` attributes have a [valid language subtag](#valid-langu | |||
|
|
|||
| ## Assumptions | |||
|
|
|||
| *There are currently no assumptions* | |||
| The `lang` or `xml:lang` attribute is being used to comply to WCAG. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think this explains anything. Can you explain?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@WilcoFiers fair point. It relates to this conversation and comment #348 (comment).
How about the following.
This rule assumes that the presence of a
langorxml:langattribute is being used to comply to WCAG. This rule doesn't test if the attribute is needed to comply to WCAG.
|
@WilcoFiers, do you think an update like this has to go into CFC stage, or can we just merge as is? |
|
Discussed on the call, that we are happy to merge this. |
* master: Rule update: "HTML page has a title" (#440) Rule update: "aria attribute allowed" and "aria required states and properties" (#436) Changed succescriteria from 4.1.2 to 1.3.1 (#449) Rename SC1-2-Video-description-track.md to SC1-2-video-description-track.md Glossary: add "Accessibility Support" to "Semantic role" term (#442) SC1-1-1-filename-is-valid-accessible-name (#263) Added assumption for SC3-1-2-lang-valid (#413) Update SC4-1-1-unique-id.md fix: update applicability fix: revert definitions fix: update glossary fix: applicability
Based on discussion in #348