AG WG Review: 4.1.1 Parsing WCAG2ICT guidance

maryjom commented 4 months ago

Summary

Review of proposed WCAG2ICT guidance for 4.1.1 Parsing, as incorporated into the Editor's draft. This is update to the content was previously reviewed by the AG WG in Nov-Dec. 2023 (in Issue #266). There were some concerns indicated in that review regarding the content relating to WCAG 2.0 and 2.1. The TF has updated that part of the guidance by using the 2013 WCAG2ICT document's guidance for 4.1.1 Parsing and making some updates to the examples and notes.

Maturity Level

Refining

Action Needed

Review content (See Content for Review section below for details.)
Use the thumbs up and thumbs down icons to indicate agreement or disagreement with various comments. Do not add comments to simply support other comments.
Note any suggested edits for improvement and/or reasoning either in a comment on this issue or by creating a PR on the WCAG2ICT document. All SCs can be found in the comments-by-guideline-and-success-criteria.md file.

Background information

Once finalized, this new WCAG2ICT Note will replace the 2013 Note, and it covers all three WCAG versions (2.0, 2.1, or 2.2). This is important as different jurisdictions are using different versions of WCAG for the accessibility of information and communication technology. Since the existence of 4.1.1 Parsing is different, depending on the WCAG version, there is guidance for WCAG 2.2 and different guidance for WCAG 2.0 and 2.1.

Content for Review

Section Applying SC 4.1.1 Parsing to Non-Web Documents and Software.

Reference Material

In case you need them, links to various resources on 4.1.1 Parsing

WCAG 2.0 and 2.1 errata for Parsing can be found in the WCAG 2.0 editorial errata #13 and the WCAG 2.1 editorial errata - last bullet
WCAG 2.2 4.1.1 Parsing

mraccess77 commented 4 months ago

The original SC mentions markup languages and the note references markdown languages.

alastc commented 4 months ago

The " (per the WCAG errata.)" part of Note 4 is a bit confusing. If the editors note at the top is removed before publication, there will be no other mention of it. Also, I think it's a note rather than errata.

I suggest linking through to the Note for each, e.g. (as outlined in the WCAG 2.1 note on 4.1.1)

mraccess77 commented 4 months ago

The original SC mentions markup languages and the note references markdown languages.

The note I was referring to above looks like it was updated to markup. My comment was NOT about the area mentioning LaTex but in the note. So it seems like this issue has already been addressed.

This was the note As in Web content, 4.1.1 Parsing is not known to have any effect on the accessibility of non-web documents or software. There are no known examples of non-web documents or software that would have an issue such as those covered by 4.1.1 Parsing. Modern assistive technology does not parse document or software markdown languages for accessibility information. User agents and platforms used to render non-web documents and software use platform accessibility APIs to present accessibility information to AT. Therefore, 4.1.1 Parsing would no longer be a requirement for accessibility. https://github.com/w3c/wcag2ict/blob/e89f3efdba7dfe51016282544aa1ec7a73a204c7/comments-by-guideline-and-success-criterion.md

maryjom commented 4 months ago

See PR #379 to address comment from @alastc.

maryjom commented 3 months ago

Closing this issue, since the AG WG review is done. WCAG2ICT document is now in CfC to publish that ends on 1 July.

w3c / wcag2ict