Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

SC 3.2.6 Findable Help - Goal of Criterion Ambiguous #1435

Closed
omar-bonilla opened this issue Sep 18, 2020 · 4 comments
Closed

SC 3.2.6 Findable Help - Goal of Criterion Ambiguous #1435

omar-bonilla opened this issue Sep 18, 2020 · 4 comments

Comments

@omar-bonilla
Copy link

On Behalf of Thomson Reuters:

This criterion does not mandate that a site owner provide help, only that it must be offered in the same relative order on all pages if it exists. Without this requirement, it seems that many of the goals of this criterion are already covered under 3.2.3 Consistent Navigation.

While the Intent text states that “at least one of the following mechanisms to get help should be included,” the actual criterion does not offer this as a requirement (“if one of the following is available, then access to at least one option is included in the same relative order on each page”).

@omar-bonilla omar-bonilla changed the title 3.2.6 Findable Help - Goal of Criterion Ambiguous SC 3.2.6 Findable Help - Goal of Criterion Ambiguous Sep 18, 2020
@alastc alastc added this to To do in WCAG 2.2 via automation Sep 19, 2020
@gradualclearing gradualclearing self-assigned this Sep 29, 2020
@gradualclearing
Copy link
Contributor

Unclear Intent

The first paragraph of the "Intent" section starts with, "The intent of this success criterion is to ensure users can find help for completing tasks on a Web site." The next paragraph starts with, "Locating the help mechanism in a consistent location across pages makes it easier for users to find it."

The remainder of the Understanding document describes the importance of providing help, e.g., "When having problems completing a task on a Web site, people with some types of disabilities may not be able to work through the issue without further help," which implies that the purpose of the SC is twofold:

  1. That help be provided, and
  2. That options be provided in the same relative order, so help is easy to find.

However, the wording of the SC does not address the first requirement, due to the use of "if":

For single page Web applications or any set of Web pages, if one of the following is available, then access to at least one option is included in the same relative order on each page:

  • Human contact details;
  • Human contact mechanism;
  • Self-help option;
  • A fully automated contact mechanism.

Option 1: Help and Location

If the intent is to provide help and provide it consistently, the SC should be updated.

Proposed rewording:

For single page web applications or any set of web pages, at least one of the following options is provided, in the same relative order on each page:

  • Human contact details;
  • Human contact mechanism;
  • Self-help option;
  • A fully automated contact mechanism.

Also, the Understanding document should be updated to clarify the requirement to provide help options. For example, the Failures should be updated to include "No Help Options" as well as "Inconsistent Help Location."

Option 2: Location Only

If the intent is to ensure help options, when provided, are provided in a consistent location, the Understanding document should be updated to focus on how the help options are provided rather the benefits of providing help.

@alastc Can you clarify the intent?

Overlap with 3.2.3 Consistent Navigation

Given that help options are not necessarily navigation, for example, contact details on the page, this SC is sufficiently different from 3.2.3 Consistent Navigation, but we should clarify its relationship to 3.2.3 Consistent Navigation.

Proposed amendment: Cross-reference 3.2.3 Consistent Navigation in the Understanding document, so that navigation-based help options conform to 3.2.3 Consistent Navigation.

@alastc
Copy link
Contributor

alastc commented Jan 21, 2021

Hi @gradualclearing,

Originally, the intent was help is provided and it is findable. However, various scenarios were uncovered where adding help was either not beneficial or not feasible, so that aspect was made an "if it is provided".

So the next step is for someone to propose the updates to the understanding document, option 2.

rachaelbradley added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 4, 2021
Clarify that help is not required by this SC per issue #1435
@rachaelbradley
Copy link
Contributor

rachaelbradley commented Mar 4, 2021

Approve group response: The intent of this SC is to make help findable when it is provided. We had already added a sentence based on other feedback that states "It is not the intent of this Success Criterion to require authors to provide help information on PDFs or other static documents that may be available for viewing/download from the Web pages." Pull request 1669 adds another clarifying phrase earlier in the document to address the sentence raised in this issue.

@alastc
Copy link
Contributor

alastc commented Mar 10, 2021

The response above was agreed by the group, an PR #1679 implements the several changes, including an update to the SC text.

@alastc alastc closed this as completed Mar 10, 2021
WCAG 2.2 automation moved this from To do to Done Mar 10, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
WCAG 2.2
  
Done
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants