Interruptions

[lseeman]

• SC for viewing | SC for editing
• easily available definition for viewing | easily available definition for editing
• SC in full draft guideline

SC Shortname: Interruptions

SC Text

There is an easily available mechanism to postpone and suppress interruptions and changes in content unless they are initiated by the user or involve an emergency.

Suggestion for Priority Level (A/AA/AAA)

A or AA

Related Glossary additions or changes

current context - as defined in WCAG

easily available (or easily available mode or setting) one or more of the following are true:

• can be set one time with as wide a scope as possible (such as using the standards of the OS, From ISO 9241-112 or GPII when available)
• has the option to save or change the setting, where available interoperably, but also for the scope of the set of web pages
• is reachable from each screen where it may be needed, and the path and the control conforms to all of this document

What Principle and Guideline the SC falls within.

Principle 2 Guideline 2

Description

The intent of this Success Criterion is that people with impaired attention and memory can complete a task. When users are interrupted, they may forget what they are doing and abandon the task. This can happen even when the original task is extremely important. For example, a user is making a doctor's appointment, but interruptions cause the user to forget what they were doing and the critical appointment is not made.

From Etsi “Presented information is free from distractions if the information is presented so that required information will be perceived without other presented information interfering with its perception. Distractions from a user's point of view can result from distracting events and from information overload. Freedom from distraction involves minimizing distractions and avoiding distractions.”

Where a site may generate interruptions and changes of content, the user must be able to easily turn them off to control them, such that:

1. Interruptions can be easily controlled and turned off
2. Secondary content (such as special offers or complementary material) can be easily identified, controlled and turned off
3. No sudden changes occur on the site
4. Media events can be easily controlled and turned off
5. Chat can be easily turned off and on again
6. Non-critical messages can easily be turned off and on again
7. Where standard techniques exists for the above, they should be used
8. Further pop-ups and similar distractions must always be easy to close and avoid so that all people can continue their task.

   It is worth noting that the task force is proposing semantics to support an integrated solution. This is a proposal to help people stay focused and productive. It is based on a matrix for distractions at the operating system, browser, or cloud level. Currently people can turn off distractions such as Skype, and Facebook, across different devices, and then may forget to turn them back on. This idea manages all distractions by forming a cross-application and cross-device distraction matrix that manages all distractions in one setting. People and users can be clustered in terms of importance or groups. For example, the CEO and your child's care giver could both be considered critical contacts. So even if they do not feel the message is urgent, they can sometimes disrupt the user anyway. Some family members and important colleagues can be in another group, friends and extended family in a third group, system messages from the compliance system can be a different group again.

   Dimensions in the matrix can include: Groups of contacts, how urgent the contact feels any message is, and the level of interruptions the user can tolerate at any given time or setting. The user can set how to handle any combination of the above for the level of concentration needed at the time. For example, during normal work hours, messages from important colleagues could interrupt the user, but any other messages would get logged and read when the user has time. In another example, the user may be giving a talk and sets the interruption level to critical. Then, only critical messages from key colleagues and family can interrupt (for example, messages that a critical contact feels are critical and urgent). Default systems can include setting work hours. Optionally, distractions such as news websites could also be limited in low distraction times.

   Further pop-ups and similar distractions must always be consistently easy to close and avoid so that all people can continue their task.

    

Benefits

Distractions can cause people with cognitive disabilities to lose focus on the current action being performed or draw attention away from the primary content and can be difficult for some users to know how to understand, avoid and/or stop them. Drawing the user's attention away from primary content can create a range of issues depending on the user's impairment(s). If a user also has a low short term memory they may forget what task they are doing, and be unable to continue. If a user is consuming content and their attention is drawn away this may impact their ability to consume the primary content or complete an interaction or process. If a user is carrying out a complete multi-step action (such as form filling), being distracted may cause the user to lose context, thread or position in the action or sequence of actions.

Once people have become distracted it can be difficult for them to remember what they were doing. This is especially problematic for people with both low attention and impaired memory such as people with dementia.

Attention is affected for most people with cognitive disabilities, including dementia and ADHD. Other people with disabilities may find it hard to focus with a high-arousal page with moving text and animated images.

This is fully discussed in the Distraction Issue paper

Related Resources (optional)

Resources are for information purposes only, no endorsement implied.

• Gap analysis section X ....
• User needs Table 2: Context and distractions
• Background research document
• Semantics for adaptive interfaces
• Script for personalization and Example for personalization
• Personalization and Preferences
• COGA Techniques
• Attention Alert: A Study on Distraction Reveals Some Surprises
• Experimentally Induced Distraction Impacts Cognitive but not Emotional Processes in Think-Aloud Cognitive Assessment
• Wiig, E. H., & Austin, P. W. (1972). Visual attention and distraction in aphasic and non-aphasic children. Perceptual and motor skills, 35(3), 863-866.

Testability

• Step 1: Is there content added to or replacing the content in the current context that was not initiated by the user or other interruptions?
• Step 2: If yes, can the user easily postpone or suppress them, or are they for emergencies only?

Expected results:

• Step one is negative or
• Step two is positive

Techniques

1. Using semantics and personalization to allow a user to turn off distractions
2. Providing methods to control and turn off media events
3. Media events can be easily controlled and turned off

Failures

1. Failure of success criteria 2.2.4 due to secondary content (such as special offers or complementary material) that cannot be easily identified, controlled, and turned off
2. Failure of success criteria 2.2.4 because sudden changes occur on the site
3. Failure of success criteria 2.2.4 because media events cannot be easily controlled and turned off
4. Failure of success criteria 2.2.4 because chat cannot be easily turned off and on again
5. Failure of success criteria 2.2.4 because non-critical messages interrupt the user

working groups notes (optional)

[lseeman]

To get rid of the bullets I suggest rewording to
2.2.4 Interruptions: There is an easily available mechanism to postpone and suppress interruptions and changes in content unless they are initiated by the user or involve anֲ emergency
Level AA

Ia there any reason that this should not be AA?

[johnfoliot]

Is there a current definition of "easily available"? I am concerned that this may be seen as too subjective - what is easy for some may not be easy for others, and it is unclear how to accurately (and repeatedly) test for this condition. Would you consider this alternative? 2.2.4(.1) Interruptions: Users must be able to postpone and suppress interruptions and changes in content using an obvious mechanism, unless they are initiated by the user or involve anֲ emergency. I think that swapping out "easily available" with "obvious" achieves the same end-goal, but is perhaps a bit more precise (and here, we can likely also define "obvious" in a testable fashion, perhaps as part of our Appendix Glossary. (For example, I could envision both on-screen "do not interrupt" buttons on a page, or a pop-up similar to what we see for time-out notifications - with or without a checkbox that "remembers my decision" - either during the current state, or by setting a cookie for repeat visits - all examples/suggestions of possible techniques when the time comes to write those) And no, I cannot see a reason why this shouldn't be an AA. JF

…

On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Lisa Seeman ***@***.***> wrote: To get rid of the bullets I suggest rewording to 2.2.4 Interruptions: There is an easily available mechanism to postpone and suppress interruptions and changes in content unless they are initiated by the user or involve anֲ emergency Level AA Ia there any reason that this should not be AA? — You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#47 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABK-cxVbpBEX-YwR1PIFUGNM933G7rAdks5rT89KgaJpZM4K9IsL> .

-- John Foliot Principal Accessibility Strategist Deque Systems Inc. john.foliot@deque.com Advancing the mission of digital accessibility and inclusion

[lseeman]

Hello @johnfoliot

easily available (or easily available mode or setting) is defined above as

one or more of the following are true:

•  can be set one time with as wide a scope as possible (such as using the standards of the OS, From ISO 9241-112 or GPII when available)
  

•   has the option to save or change the setting, where available interoperably, but also for the scope of the set of web pages
  

•    is reachable from each screen where it may be needed, and the path and the control conforms to all of this document
  

Is that clear enough?
Thanks for the feedback ...L

[lseeman]

losing the number to conform with the stand alone requirement

[patrickhlauke]

Is this not currently covered by 2.2.1 Timing Adjustable and/or would some of this not overlap with 2.2.1/warrant extending the wording of 2.2.1?

[lseeman]

@patrickhlauke It is realy a different problem. Here it is not a time out, but an interruption such as a message or other items that de-focues the user. If someone has a bad short term memory and losses focus easily then these sudden pop ups with offers or messages are realy debilitating.
Does that make sence?
Also we have been told not to change the wording of exsisting SC

[lseeman]

to greggs comment on the list. Loading a page that the user has asked to go to is not an interruption. Clicking on a link is a user initiated action. Do you want us to add that to the SC text or to the description ?

[patrickhlauke]

an interruption such as a message or other items that de-focues the user

ah, gotcha. sorry, i misread current 2.2.1's understanding where it mentioned "changes of content" as "changes of context".

[lseeman]

that makes sense...

[patrickhlauke]

Wondering if this needs some extra clarification / distinction between visual users and screen reader users. Unless actual focus (in the programmatic/user agent sense) isn't moved to whatever has changed/appeared, non-sighted screen reader users may actually be at an advantage here and not get distracted the same way that sighted users do, but we still want to make sure that this situation is a clear fail.

Apart from that this looks reasonably good to me :)

[joshueoconnor]

@lseeman Is there a PR ready to go on this or do you need more time?

[lseeman]

PTR was made All the best Lisa Seeman LinkedIn, Twitter

…

---- On Sat, 04 Feb 2017 19:53:19 +0200 joshueoconnor&lt;notifications@github.com&gt; wrote ---- @lseeman Is there a PR ready to go on this or do you need more time? — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

[mbgower]

My concern surrounds the use of the word "emergency." There seems to me to be a fairly large amount of communication outside this definition that a user could benefit from. Examples:

• in an application that includes meeting functions, I'm reminded that I have a meeting beginning now
• in an app that has error control, I'm notified that my entry for a field is unacceptable
• in a password field, I'm notified that my caps lock is on

Is the intent that all forms of communication from an app can be turned off by the user?

On a different topic, is interruption defined somewhere? That may get me to a better understanding of what constitutes an interruption. Otherwise I need some clarity on where in a continuum something becomes an interruption, such as:

1. a dialog that takes focus
2. a bubble/tooltip that appears but does not take focus
3. new text that appears on screen without taking focus
4. changes in colour and iconography that signal an error

[mbgower]

Just reabsorbing this, and getting a better handle on how this is an update/replacement of a current SC. Your first bullet provides a bit more context for my question on interruption:

no content should be added to or replace the content in the current context unless the additions or replacement are initiated by the user

So my read on this is that you would consider all 4 of the items I listed in my prior comment to be interruptions and they could not occur if a user chose to suppress them. Correct?

[lseeman]

emergency and interruptions is already in wcag 2.0 so we do not need to define it again

[lseeman]

we need to use rewording to make it a new sc (stand alone)

[mbgower]

emergency and interruptions is already in wcag 2.0 so we do not need to define it again

I don't see a definition of Interruptions in 2.0, only Emergency. Regardless of the term being used in as AAA SC last time, if you are proposing moving such language into A or AA, we need to get better clarity.

It's pretty clear that anything that takes focus would be an interruption, but can you confirm that

no content should be added to or replace the content in the current context unless the additions or replacement are initiated by the user

would mean all of the following would be prevented from occurring?

• a bubble/tooltip that appears but does not take focus
• new text that appears on screen without taking focus (i.e., "Caps lock is on")
• changes in colour and iconography that signal an error without taking focus

[mbgower]

8 Further pop-ups and similar distractions must always be easy to close and avoid so that all people can continue their task.

So should this concept be worked in somewhere? Or are you saying this is already addressed by another SC?

[awkawk]

Pull request at #98
Comments should go there moving forward.

[awkawk]

Updated the issue description to reflect the FPWD text and reopening issue.

[joshueoconnor]

Would like to see any potential conflict with WCAG 2.0 SC 2.2.1 Timing Adjustable addressed. Thanks to Alex Li for raising this at TPAC.