F87 - removing the with-AT clauses #473
Conversation
techniques/failures/F87.html
Outdated
| @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ | |||
| <!DOCTYPE html><html lang="en" xml:lang="en" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><head><title>Failure of Success Criterion 1.3.1 due to inserting non-decorative content by using :before and :after pseudo-elements and the 'content' property in CSS</title><link rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" href="../../css/sources.css" class="remove"></link></head><body><h1>Failure of Success Criterion 1.3.1 due to inserting non-decorative content by using :before and :after pseudo-elements and the 'content' property in CSS</h1><section class="meta"><p class="id">ID: F87</p><p class="technology">Technology: failures</p><p class="type">Type: Failure</p></section><section id="applicability"><h2>When to Use</h2> | |||
| <p>All technologies that support CSS.</p> | |||
| </section><section id="description"><h2>Description</h2> | |||
| <p>The CSS :before and :after pseudo-elements specify the location of content before and after an element's document tree content. The content property, in conjunction with these pseudo-elements, specifies what is inserted. For users who need to customize or turn off style information in order to view content according to their needs, assistive technologies may not be able to access the information that is inserted using CSS. Therefore, it is a failure to use these properties to insert non-decorative content.</p> | |||
| <p>The CSS :before and :after pseudo-elements specify the location of content before and after an element's document tree content. The content property, in conjunction with these pseudo-elements, specifies what is inserted. For users who need to customize or turn off style information in order to view content according to their needs, they may not be able to access the information that is inserted using CSS. Therefore, it is a failure to use these properties to insert non-decorative content.</p> | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm wary of adding "or turn off" since in WCAG you can rely on a technology like CSS or Javascript and requiring support for users turning off styles isn't mandated. I think that if we strike the "or turn off" phrase we will be ok.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That phrase was there already, I just removed the "assistive technologies may not be able to access the information" bit as that is not true anymore.
techniques/failures/F87.html
Outdated
| @@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ | |||
| <ol> | |||
| <li>Examine all content inserted through use of the :before and :after pseudo-elements and the content property</li> | |||
| <li>Verify that the content is decorative.</li> | |||
| <li>If the inserted content is not decorative, check that the information is provided to assistive technologies and is also available when CSS is turned off.</li> | |||
| <li>If the inserted content is not decorative, check that the information is available when the :before and :after styles are overriden, or when CSS is turned off.</li> | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm wondering how this evolves. What if the browsers allow stacking of styles so the "jim:" that precedes a line in the can also have a paragraph symbol or series of dots to indicate a heading if the user wants that? Would the "or when CSS is turned off" still make sense? I get that today the turning off of CSS is the easy substitute for the actual test, but am not sure if it is the right thing to do.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
CSS overrides are fairly course by necessity, unless you create super-specific, site-only styles then you either over-ride it or not.
I don't see a wide-use scenario where you would have multiple pseudo elements with content, so I can't see how that would be supported. (You would have extra real, DOM elements instead.)
|
I'm ok with the change although I agree it's a nebulous area. |
|
"overriden" should probably be "overridden" |
For issue #433