Heading Structure Available

Questions whether there is a requirement for headings to be visually distinct at all, since headings that are not distinct for anyone are not obviously an accessibility question. Accepts differentiating font from typeface as long as the result is programmatically different. Pushes back on the suggestion that sufficient semantics on headings matters more than visual presentation, reading "sufficient semantics" as "sufficient meaning" and suggesting, with the hedge "(I don’t think)", that WCAG cannot require authors who write meaningless headings to rewrite them, while asking whether WilcoFiers meant something different.

Holds that content structure for a good visual hierarchy matters for COGA among others, and that it is simultaneously a contrast question: padding around a heading, leading and letter spacing all change perceived contrast, as does font weight. Argues weight is the most critical spatial quality because it sets the spatial frequency that drives contrast sensitivity, illustrated with same-color samples at different weights placed on the contrast sensitivity curve. Also warns that the CSS font-size metric is close to futile as an absolute, since size and weight vary massively between families.

Wants existing sufficiently distinct methods catalogued so a requirement does not accidentally remove one, and stresses that combinations of distinctions matter. Proposes four groups rather than Myndex's three: spatial, visual text attributes, content, and external indicators, with capitalization, writing system, sentence type and person placed under content. Argues writing system in particular belongs with content, since writing in sitelen pona carries semantics and nuance that Latin script or speech does not.

Filed #81 on behalf of a commenter who wrote to public-agwg-comments; the submitted comment asks for an outcome stating that section heading levels be semantically nested so they form a hierarchical outline of the content, and that there be only one h1 per page, reserved for introducing the main content or topic and matching or closely resembling the page title. No one has replied since May 2024.

Opened #478 asking that "higher" and "lower" be replaced when referring to heading levels, since which direction each word points is ambiguous. Also wants "meaningful block of content" clearly defined and exceptions specified, recognising that paragraphs, letters and emails may not require headings, while insisting any exception be explicit enough that it cannot be used as a loophole. Notes both items may resolve from a single consistent definition.