Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jun 30, 2018. It is now read-only.

Success Criterion 1.3.4 Identify Common Purpose [Trace] #602

Closed
GreggVan opened this issue Dec 6, 2017 · 3 comments
Closed

Success Criterion 1.3.4 Identify Common Purpose [Trace] #602

GreggVan opened this issue Dec 6, 2017 · 3 comments

Comments

@GreggVan
Copy link

GreggVan commented Dec 6, 2017

Success Criterion 1.3.4 Identify Common Purpose§
(Level AA) [New]
In content implemented using markup languages, for each user interface component that serves a purpose identified in the Common Purposes for User Interface Components section, that purpose can be programmatically determined.

much better
but a bit ambiguous that you need to user the term in the list

suggest that you add "USING THE LISTED NAME" to the end.

In content implemented using markup languages, for each user interface component that serves a purpose identified in the Common Purposes for User Interface Components section, that purpose can be programmatically determined USING THE LISTED NAME.

@awkawk
Copy link
Member

awkawk commented Dec 19, 2017

WG Response: Thank you for your comment. The list of purposes is explicitly not requiring that the author use the specific text to identify a purpose, so adding the requirement to use the listed name is different than what we intended. For example, the "Table of Contents" purpose may be referenced using a different term depending on whether the author is incorporating metadata from one schema or another - one schema might use "toc" and another might use "tableOfContents" but as long as they are aligned with the purpose expressed in the list (and as long as there is accessibility support) either would be sufficient.

@GreggVan
Copy link
Author

GreggVan commented Dec 21, 2017 via email

@awkawk
Copy link
Member

awkawk commented Jan 10, 2018

closing as duplicate of 635.

@awkawk awkawk closed this as completed Jan 10, 2018
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants