Understanding 1.4.13 Content on hover or focus (Level AA)

[nrhsinclair]

Post suggested revisions here.

[cochfarf]

Under the Dismissable section, second paragraph is the word "Alternatively" necessary?

[Amace41]

In the Intent heading, first paragraph: Suggest changing the "in coordination with" to "automatically on keyboard focus or pointer hover...." Same heading, list item 3: Spelling error "intefere" should be "interfere"

[RachelComerford]

Under Intent heading, Item 3, change "do" to "perform"? Current: the new content may intefere with a user's ability to do a task Proposed: the new content may intefere with a user's ability to perform a task

Under Intent heading: "There are usually more predictable and accessible means of adding content to the page, which authors are recommended to employ."

• This is good information but more helpful with links to recommended solutions/approaches that are alternatives to this approach.

Under Note I had trouble parsing the intention of the note - it seemed to say that the SC covered more than just the component but also not? I wanted to suggest edits but I wasn't sure what the intended message was.

Hoverable Current: The intent of this condition is to ensure that additional content which may appear on hover of a target may also be hovered itself. Proposed: The intent of this condition is to ensure that when additional content appears as a hover because a pointer has come into contact with a trigger on the page, keeping the pointer within the content within the hover is sufficient to keep the hover open.

Persistent Current: The user removes hover or focus from the trigger and the additional content, consistent with the typical user experience;

• Do we want to add 'to satisfy the Hoverable condition' ?

Benefits Current: users with low pointer accuracy will be able to more easily dismiss unintentionally-triggered additional content Grammatical Correction: Users with low pointer accuracy will be able to more easily dismiss unintentionally-triggered additional content.

[bakkenb]

Under "Intent" heading. Drop the word "must" form this sentence (not needed)...

The intent of this success criterion is to ensure that authors who cause additional content to appear and disappear in this manner must design the interaction in such a way that users can:

To me, the NOTE was clear. Basically saying that something that is not visible becomes visible AND is the trigger is not what this SC is about. Like if you tab to a "Skip" link and it shows up, but does not cover anything or go away until you tab away. IMO it's complicated, but doesn't need rewording.

Under "Hoverable" heading Current: The intent of this condition is to ensure that additional content which may appear on hover of a target may also be hovered itself. Proposed: The intent of this condition is to ensure that the additional content that appears on hover remains when continuing to hover over the trigger OR over the additional content.

[a11ycob]

Under the Dismissable section, second paragraph is the word "Alternatively" necessary?

removed

[a11ycob]

In the Intent heading, first paragraph: Suggest changing the "in coordination with" to "automatically on keyboard focus or pointer hover...." Same heading, list item 3: Spelling error "intefere" should be "interfere"

Amanda, if we remove "automatically" as well so that it reads "Additional content that appears and disappears on keyboard focus or pointer hover..." do you think it still reads well?

[a11ycob]

Under Intent heading, Item 3, change "do" to "perform"? Current: the new content may intefere with a user's ability to do a task Proposed: the new content may intefere with a user's ability to perform a task

Under Intent heading: "There are usually more predictable and accessible means of adding content to the page, which authors are recommended to employ."

* This is good information but more helpful with links to recommended solutions/approaches that are alternatives to this approach.

My general sense is they are trying to discourage using these techniques. As such I made a smallchange to reflect that: "Due to inherent accessibility issues associated with these techniques, it is advised to avoid them where possible. If an author does choose..." Thoughts and comments welcome.

Under Note I had trouble parsing the intention of the note - it seemed to say that the SC covered more than just the component but also not? I wanted to suggest edits but I wasn't sure what the intended message was.

I've made the following attempt to add clarity: "This SC applies to content that is exposed as a result of a hover or focus trigger. It is, however, not applicable with exposing the trigger itself. For example, a Skip to Main link, exposed on keyboard focus (with no additional content beyond the trigger visibility) is not covered by the SC."

Hoverable Current: The intent of this condition is to ensure that additional content which may appear on hover of a target may also be hovered itself. Proposed: The intent of this condition is to ensure that when additional content appears as a hover because a pointer has come into contact with a trigger on the page, keeping the pointer within the content within the hover is sufficient to keep the hover open.

Persistent Current: The user removes hover or focus from the trigger and the additional content, consistent with the typical user experience;

* Do we want to add 'to satisfy the Hoverable condition' ?

Benefits Current: users with low pointer accuracy will be able to more easily dismiss unintentionally-triggered additional content Grammatical Correction: Users with low pointer accuracy will be able to more easily dismiss unintentionally-triggered additional content.

[a11ycob]

Under "Intent" heading. Drop the word "must" form this sentence (not needed)...

The intent of this success criterion is to ensure that authors who cause additional content to appear and disappear in this manner must design the interaction in such a way that users can:

To me, the NOTE was clear. Basically saying that something that is not visible becomes visible AND is the trigger is not what this SC is about. Like if you tab to a "Skip" link and it shows up, but does not cover anything or go away until you tab away. IMO it's complicated, but doesn't need rewording.

I agree with Rachel that the note section could use a bit of clarity. I took a stab at tightening up the language. We can always revert back to the original if the group feels the change is not helpful.

Under "Hoverable" heading Current: The intent of this condition is to ensure that additional content which may appear on hover of a target may also be hovered itself. Proposed: The intent of this condition is to ensure that the additional content that appears on hover remains when continuing to hover over the trigger OR over the additional content.

Added this to the doc.

[Amace41]

Thanks Chris. Happy to drop the 'automatically', the message is still clear so it's probably a little redundant.