See also: IRC log
<trackbot> Date: 21 March 2013
<MichaelC> scribe: Kathy
<MichaelC> chair; Loretta_Guarino_Reid
<adam_solomon> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-WCAG20-TECHS/SCR26
<greggvanderheiden> We do note that having content inserted above the current focus point without notifying the user of it and its location can be a problem for users who cannot see this. We don't currently have an SC however that forbids this. An advisory technique describing solutions to this, such as ARIA Live Regions, would be helpful. We have added this to our Post WCAG 2.0 wiki as well.
<greggvanderheiden> This provision only says the the content is in a linear order. IF the person activates a control and changes the context - the (new/revised) content may still be in a logical order and meet the success criterion (2.4.3). Putting it behind their point of focus may not be helpful or even good but it is not a violation of 2.4.3. (Dropping the focus partway down the page on page entry would also have similar problems and not be good
<greggvanderheiden> but is not a violation of 2.4.3 either.)
<greggvanderheiden> This provision only says the the content is in a logical order. IF the person activates a control and changes the context - the (new/revised) content may still be in a logical order and meet the success criterion (2.4.3). Putting it behind their point of focus may not be helpful or even good but it is not a violation of 2.4.3. (Dropping the focus partway down the page on page entry would also have similar problems and not be good
<greggvanderheiden> but is not a violation of 2.4.3 either.)
<greggvanderheiden> We do note that having content inserted above the current focus point without notifying the user of it and its location can be a problem for users who cannot see this. We don't currently have an SC however that forbids this. An advisory technique describing solutions to this, such as ARIA Live Regions, would be helpful. We have added this to our Post WCAG 2.0 wiki as well.
<greggvanderheiden> v
<greggvanderheiden> We do note that having content inserted above the current focus point without notifying the user of it and its location can be a problem for users who cannot see this. We don't currently have an SC however that forbids this. An advisory technique describing solutions to this, such as ARIA Live Regions, would be helpful. We have added this to our Post WCAG 2.0 wiki as well.
<greggvanderheiden> This provision only says the the content is in a logical order. IF the person activates a control and changes the context - the (new/revised) content may still be in a logical order and meet the success criterion (2.4.3).
<greggvanderheiden> We do note that having content inserted above the current focus point without notifying the user of it, and its location can be a problem for users who cannot see this. We don't currently have an SC however that forbids this. An advisory technique describing solutions to this, such as ARIA Live Regions, would be helpful. We have added this to our Post WCAG 2.0 wiki as well. (Dropping the focus partway down the page on page entry
<greggvanderheiden> would also have similar problems and not be good but is not a violation of 2.4.3 either.)
RESOLUTION: Accepted as amended
RESOLUTION: Accepted as proposed
RESOLUTION: Change back to open issue
RESOLUTION: Accepted as amended
RESOLUTION: accept with removal of the "or appropriate" in rationale
RESOLUTION: accept with addition "of the success criterion" after "...Note 2" or else it is unclear what note is being referred to.
RESOLUTION: accepted as proposed
RESOLUTION: accepted as proposed
<BBailey> bye
bye
<kerstin> bye
<kerstin> -kerstin