Accessibility Minutes 2009 05 20

From MemberWiki

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Participants

  • Ann Abbott (IBM)
  • Jon Gunderson (University of Illinois)
  • Nathan Jakubiak (ParaSoft)
  • Vio Onut (IBM)
  • Rich Schwerdtfeger (IBM - chair)
  • David Todd (IBM)
  • Derk Stegemann (FIT)
  • Michael Squillace (IBM)


Minutes

Link Rules

Rich: Topic is Link Rules

Jon G: Rule 2.4.4 and 2.4.9 cover uniqueness and descriptive

David: addressing A and AA and AAA?

Rich: Doubt we can test for link context - need to be manual effort?

Jon: is effort worth it? Seem to be screen reader specific, but don't think ATs do that - more the user effort, so testing may not be meaningful.

Jon: links may need to be unique within contextual block.

Jon: what would be problems/coding samples for examples to determine pass/fail?

David: empty link text would fail because AT can get there, but no one else can.

David: are we going to distinguish between A & AAA?

Jon: we'll distinguish between 2.4.4 and 2.4.9

Jon: are there any changes at AT level for handling aria described-by

David: JAWS will alert user to press F1 Help when encountering aria described-by

Jon: then that would be preferred technique

Rich: do what is very simple to test.

Jon: Best Practices group: images should be 16x16 pixels and link text needs at least 4 characters - both facilitate ease of clicking.

David: 4 characters Best Practice may be language-dependent.

Vio: currently scan page and flag error if same name but point to different URLs

Nathan: standard for 2.4.4 doesn't require uniqueness, but 2.4.9 does

Jon: could be made unique with aria-describedby

Rich: are these Best Practices?

Jon: these are WCAG 2.4.4

Jon: probably will all pass, so is it worth doing the computation?

Rich: start with Language Rules next week

Action Items

No action items for this meeting.

Personal tools