Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 28 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.Sign up
SC Shortname: Interruptions
SC TextThere 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
What Principle and Guideline the SC falls within.
Principle 2 Guideline 2
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:
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.
working groups notes (optional)
Preliminary WG comments requested
Ready for WG Review
Preliminary WG comments requested
Nov 27, 2016
To get rid of the bullets I suggest rewording to
Ia there any reason that this should not be AA?
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. firstname.lastname@example.org Advancing the mission of digital accessibility and inclusion
easily available (or easily available mode or setting) is defined above as
one or more of the following are true:
Is that clear enough?
@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.
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 :)
PTR was made All the best Lisa Seeman LinkedIn, Twitter…
---- On Sat, 04 Feb 2017 19:53:19 +0200 joshueoconnor<email@example.com> 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.
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:
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:
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:
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?
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
would mean all of the following would be prevented from occurring?