Update normative wording of 4.1.3 and definition of "status message"#4952
Open
patrickhlauke wants to merge 14 commits intomainfrom
Open
Update normative wording of 4.1.3 and definition of "status message"#4952patrickhlauke wants to merge 14 commits intomainfrom
patrickhlauke wants to merge 14 commits intomainfrom
Conversation
* reintroduces the change of context part, but in the SC text, not the definition of what is or isn't a status message * removes the role/property part, so that the SC also covers things like `ariaNotify` * removes the "In content implemented using markup languages" to make this SC applicable even for status messages in things like native apps when WCAG is used in a WCAG2ICT context
✅ Deploy Preview for wcag2 ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration. |
fstrr
reviewed
Feb 24, 2026
Co-authored-by: Francis Storr <francis.storr@intel.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The current normative wording for 4.1.3 Status Messages has ... issues:
through role or propertieswould disallow the use of upcoming/new solutions, such as ariaNotify, since they are programmatic but do not rely on roles/propertiesIn content implemented using markup languageslimits the scope of this SC, which results in 4.1.3 not being applicable in cases where WCAG is being applied to other technologies (WCAG2ICT) - the current https://www.w3.org/TR/wcag2ict/#applying-sc-4-1-3-status-messages-to-non-web-documents-and-software notes that the SC "applies as written", meaning that in non-markup-language scenarios, it doesn't ... but then provides a note saying it sure would be nice if it did ("there is still a user need...") - and this handwave is also present in current draft versions of the upcoming EN 301 549 v4.1.0; many auditors currently "ignore" the markup language part when evaluating native mobile/desktop apps against WCAG, and take the fundamental principle - that AT must announce status messages when these don't receive focus - regardlessIn addition, this PR tweaks the definition of what a "status message" is - there have been discussions (such as #4672) around the fact that the definition as it currently stands can actually apply to a lot more than just what was originally intended (e.g. if, after activating a control, a table is updated ... is the whole table a "status message"? based on the current definition, it can be seen as such). the update here tries to more specifically define status messages as discrete/explicit messages (excluding the "implicit status message" given by content, like a table, being updated). it also moves out the whole part about change of context - a status message is a status message, regardless of whether or not it changes context. this part about context change was already present in the normative wording of the SC, but has been reinforced.
I believe this change, while quite deep, is backwards-compatible with the existing/current version of the wording the way it was originally intended
Current normative wording (SC + term)
Current normative wording of the SC, the definition, and "grafting" (with tweaks from singular to plural) that definition into the normative wording:
Proposed normative rewording (SC + term)
This PR proposes the following change to the SC, the definition, and shows the resulting "grafted" version (with tweaks from singular to plural) :
Closes #4676
This PR supersedes #4840 (as that one originally only tried to update the definition, but further discussion on the PR made it clear that there's more fundamental work to be done, if we're already aiming for a normative change)