I wrote up some thoughts about how CSS is becoming less complex now than it was even a few years ago. Yes, I said *less* complex. meyerweb.com/eric/thoughts/2…
10
112
8
283
I notice you commented about accessible source order. Lately the CSS WG has been getting strong feedback from a11y groups that it's important for the order in screenreaders to match the layout. Curious if you hear current sources that disagree, or if it's just change over time.
1
1
I feel like this has been an argument in accessibility circles for a while now, and I don’t feel like I’ve seen a clear answer. And I’d be curious to know how screen layout and reading are supposed to be matched. +@feather @mattmay @goodwitch
1
3
Great question. It is ideal (but not required) for the visual order to match the source code order. If someone tells you it is a legal requirement to make them match, they are stretching the truth. #a11y
1
5
Requirement in WCAG 2.0 SC 1.3.2 "Meaningful Sequence: When the sequence in which content is presented affects its meaning, a correct reading sequence can be programmatically determined. (Level A)" Notice it just requires meaningful, not an exact match. w3.org/TR/2008/REC-WCAG20-20…
1
2
I guess I was coming at the question not from the perspective of what web developers have to do to make things work right in browsers as they are today, but rather if web standards and browsers should be designed to have different defaults so developers can avoid this work.
Nov 16, 2017 · 5:01 AM UTC