[Rejected] 3e12e1 -- Block of repeated content is collapsible

[daniel-montalvo]

Ref: https://act-rules.github.io/rules/3e12e1

First paragraph of “expectation” section is really difficult to understand.

For each block of repeated content in each test target, which is before (in the flat tree) at least one node of non-repeated content after repeated content, all the following are true:

Before what?

---

The background section is difficult to understand.

There are two different things we are trying to communicate here I think, but it is not clear to me where the second starts and the first ends.

To me we want to say:

1. Technique does not require a specific location for the instrument. hence, instruments placed after the repeated content in the reading order would pass the rule, but they would not make sense as they would not really solve the issue
2. We don't use the main landmark because that would pass the SC itself.

---

An editorial pass should be taken to passed test cases descriptions. Instead of

In this document, the visibility and inclusion in the accessibility tree of the navigational block of repeated content can be toggled on and off by the link at the start of the document.

It could be

This document has a link at the start of the document to toggle the visibility and inclusion in the accessibility tree of the navigational block of repeated content

And so for the others.

WIP in #1582

[Jym77]

Ref: https://act-rules.github.io/rules/3e12e1

First paragraph of “expectation” section is really difficult to understand.

For each block of repeated content in each test target, which is before (in the flat tree) at least one node of non-repeated content after repeated content, all the following are true:

Before what?

Stripped down, this should be "for each block of repeated content which is before at least one node of non-repeated content, [some condition]". However, "before" needs to specify the order that is used. In that case, it is tree order in the flat tree, hence the parenthesis "(in the flat tree)". I'm not sure where to move that to make it easier to read. Similarly, the reference to the test targets is a bit in the middle of the sentence, but I'm not sure how to clear that up…

The background section is difficult to understand.

There are two different things we are trying to communicate here I think, but it is not clear to me where the second starts and the first ends.

To me we want to say:

1. Technique does not require a specific location for the instrument. hence, instruments placed after the repeated content in the reading order would pass the rule, but they would not make sense as they would not really solve the issue
2. We don't use the main landmark because that would pass the SC itself.

You are perfectly correct, there are actually 4 things in the Background, each in its own paragraph:

1. A note about using one or several instruments.
2. The note about instruments being pointless if they are at the end of the page.
3. The usual list of references, which in this case is shrinked down to a single link to the technique
4. The global note about the example and why we don't use main.

I guess that the one-item list in the middle isn't conveyed correctly and thus the separation between these 4 things doesn't carry well 😭 I am not sure how to improve the experience here…

[daniel-montalvo]

I took a pass at this in #1802

• Expectations
  • Removed "in each test target". Is it really necessary? Otherwise it leave some room in an already very cluttered sentence
  • Placed "in the flat tree" somewhere else in the sentence where I think it favours readability. "before at least one node of non-repeated content after repeated content in the flat tree,"
• background
  • Split into several paragraphs for better readability. Changed "after (in reading order) the block they collapse" to "after the block they collapse in reading order"

There may be more to this, but I think this at least makes it a bit clearer.