RE: [SEC508] Applying 1194.22 and .21 to Web apps

["Jonathan Avila" <jon@bartsite.com>]

I agree with Don that the issue with sufficient information would fall under
1194.22L.  The web standards also don't' cover keyboard access, but the
Access Board's Guide to the Standards implies that lack of keyboard access
to scripted controls would fall under this provision also.  I would not
associate 1194.21 unless the application uses a plug-in such as Flash, JAVA,
etc.

As far as the conflicting keystrokes, seems to me that would fall under
1194.31 Functional Performance Criteria.

Jonathan

-----Original Message-----
From: sec508-admin@trace.wisc.edu [mailto:sec508-admin@trace.wisc.edu] On
Behalf Of Barrett, Don
Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 8:26 AM
To: Sailesh Panchang; sec508@trace.wisc.edu
Cc: jongund@uiuc.edu
Subject: RE: [SEC508] Applying 1194.22 and .21 to Web apps

I would use L from 1194.22 since the controls are not yielding
"functional text."  I wouldn't recommend using pieces of 1194.21 unless
they are triggered by standard M of 1194.22.  That way, you can fully
and legitimately fair the controls since functional text is only
functional if assistive technology can navigate to and operate the
control as intended.

As far as the keyboard shortcuts interfering with the screen reader
keystrokes, that isn't covered by any standard.  I hate access keys for
that very reason, and they are usually more problem than they are worth.
Non-disabled folks who aren't too much into accessibility think we all
love them as they think their job is to make our lives easier, and
although I laud the concept, the actual practice doesn't quite deliver
as promised.

 


Don Barrett
Section 508 Coordinator
U.S. Department of Education
(202)-205-8245
don.barrett@ed.gov

-----Original Message-----
From: sec508-admin@trace.wisc.edu [mailto:sec508-admin@trace.wisc.edu]
On Behalf Of Sailesh Panchang
Sent: Wednesday, April 12, 2006 8:51 AM
To: sec508@trace.wisc.edu
Cc: jongund@uiuc.edu
Subject: [SEC508] Applying 1194.22 and .21 to Web apps

I am evaluating an application that uses multimedia content and
Javascripting for S508. As it is Web content 1194.22 will apply. But in
this case there are elements that appear as user interface elements to
the sighted user. These elements can also be activated from the keyboard
but the fact that  these elements are user interface elements and can be
activated is not conveyed at all by the application to assistive
technology.
Therefore the "identity, operation and state of the elements" is not
known to non-visual users. So can I apply para (d) of 1194.21?
Para (l) of 1194.22 only requires functional text to be associated with
interface elements created with scripting but does not require the
element to be identified as para (d) of 1194.21does.

I remember a recent post on one of these lists where Dr. John Gunderson
said that one might have to consider 1194.21 in some cases of Web apps
too. 
Or do I say this is only a Para (l) violation ?

The controls also have keyboard shortcuts that conflict with JAWS or
WinEyes and one has to use the bypass key to make them work. Any issue
there? 
Thanks,
Sailesh Panchang
Senior Accessibility Engineer
Deque Systems Inc. (www.deque.com)
11180 Sunrise Valley Drive, Suite #400,
Reston VA 20191
Phone: 703-225-0380 (ext 105)
E-mail: sailesh.panchang@deque.com

_______________________________________________
SEC508 mailing list
SEC508@trace.wisc.edu
http://trace.wisc.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/sec508


_______________________________________________
SEC508 mailing list
SEC508@trace.wisc.edu
http://trace.wisc.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/sec508