8000 H46 `noembed` is obsoleted by HTML5 · Issue #209 · w3c/wcag · GitHub
[go: up one dir, main page]
Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

H46 noembed is obsoleted by HTML5 #209

Closed
momdo opened this issue Jul 30, 2016 · 4 comments
Closed

H46 noembed is obsoleted by HTML5 #209

momdo opened this issue Jul 30, 2016 · 4 comments
Labels
Surveyed - Rejected

Comments

@momdo
Copy link
Contributor
momdo commented Jul 30, 2016

https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2016/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20160719/H46.html
If I remember correctly, noembed element never been defined in any version of the HTML standards.
The HTML5.1 spec also says "Use object instead of embed when fallback is necessary." Thus, we should use object instead of noembed.

See also:
https://www.w3.org/TR/html51/obsolete.html#elementdef-noembed
https://www.w3.org/TR/html51/semantics-embedded-content.html#the-embed-element
@awkawk
Copy link
Member
awkawk commented Aug 5, 2016

https://github.com/w3c/wcag/pull/219/files?diff=split

@awkawk awkawk closed this as completed Aug 5, 2016
@awkawk
Copy link
Member
awkawk commented Aug 16, 2016

Thank you for the comment. While this is not a technique that represents the most current practice, the group is keeping this technique active in support of legacy content.

@awkawk awkawk reopened this Aug 16, 2016
@momdo
Copy link
Contributor Author
momdo commented Aug 17, 2016

I agree with the idea to leave this technique as-is, but I'm afraid that the technique violates the WCAG 2.0 Success Criterion 4.1.1 [1] [2]. It should be clearly described in the Notes, like "willful violation" in HTML5 [3], that the H46 technique is inconsistent with the G134 [4] and H88 [5] and doesn't conform to any HTML specification (even in HTML5, which obsoletes the feature [6]).

Additionaly, from the fact that the technique is not standard-conformant, the usage of the technique is limited only to when the targeted plugin supports embed / noembed element but not object. It should be clearly noted within the document and, if possible, WCAG WG should prove clearly that there is such assistive technology or implementation.

[1] https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20/#ensure-compat
[2] https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2016/WD-UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20-20160719/ensure-compat-parses.html
[3] https://www.w3.org/TR/html5/introduction.html#compliance-with-other-specifications
[4] https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2016/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20160719/G134.html
[5] https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/2016/WD-WCAG20-TECHS-20160719/H88.html
[6] https://www.w3.org/TR/html5/obsolete.html#non-conforming-features

@awkawk
Copy link
Member
awkawk commented Aug 17, 2016

Using this technique does not violate 4.1.1.
The use of this technique would be inconsistent with G134 and H88, but as neither of those techniques (nor any technique) is required that is not a reason to remove H46.

@awkawk awkawk closed this as completed Aug 22, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
Surveyed - Rejected
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@awkawk @momdo
0