2.1.1. doesn't accurately summarise the WCAG success criterion
jfhector opened this issue · comments
The issue is both on the index page and on the details page for 2.1.1.
I have submitted a pull request to fix it: #34
1. Issue on the index page
Current phrasing
"Make sure every task can be completed without a mouse."
Problem
This doesn't work as an accurate summary of the success criterion, because:
- it doesn't mention keyboard at all, which is what this requirement is about
- it could suggest that if every task can be completed with a touch screen, then the criterion would be met. This is not the case.
Proposed solution
I propose rephrasing the summary to:
"Make sure every task can be completed using just a keyboard."
2. Issue on the details page
Current phrasing
"It must be possible for someone using a keyboard or touch device to complete all tasks in a service. This ensures that people with mobility impairments who do not use a mouse can successfully complete their goals."
"Requirements / What to do?
- All interaction and functionality is usable with a keyboard;
- All interaction and functionality is usable on a touch-screen device."
Problem
This is confusing in the same way. It suggests that if a user can complete tasks using a touch screen device, the success criterion is met. But in the official W3C WCAG, this success criterion is not about touch screen at all.
Proposed solution
I suggest rephrasing the intro paragraph to this:
"It must be possible for someone using only a keyboard (or a device that emulates keyboard commands) to complete all tasks in a service. This ensures that people with mobility or dexterity impairments who do not use a mouse can successfully complete their goals."
I also suggest deleting the second requirement about touch-screen device.
Linking in @mfairchild365 as we've reviewed this together.
@BNewing @svinkle @patrickhlauke @36degrees do you see any problem with these changes? I'm not attached to what wording we use, but I'd love to fix the issue.
i agree with the proposed change. it reflects the actual SC, where the current wording doesn't.
Looks good. 👍
Looks good to me too :)
