Identify Purpose
Tier 1 · The normative floor
Baseline compliance
What the normative text of WCAG 2.2 requires, and nothing more. Only a failure of this tier is a WCAG failure.
The bare minimum
In content built with markup languages, the purpose of user interface components, icons and regions can be programmatically determined.
Normative text
Verbatim from WCAG 2.2, W3C Recommendation 12 December 2024. Underlined terms are defined below.
In content implemented using markup languages, the purpose of user interface components, icons, and regions can be programmatically determined.
Definitions used (3)
Glossary definitions are normative. Their notes are informative.
- user interface component
-
a part of the content that is perceived by users as a single control for a distinct function
Informative notes (3)
Multiple user interface components may be implemented as a single programmatic element. "Components" here is not tied to programming techniques, but rather to what the user perceives as separate controls.
User interface components include form elements and links as well as components generated by scripts.
What is meant by "component" or "user interface component" here is also sometimes called "user interface element".
- region
-
perceivable, programmatically determined section of content
Informative notes (1)
In HTML, any area designated with a landmark role would be a region.
- programmatically determined
-
determined by software from author-supplied data provided in a way that different user agents, including assistive technologies, can extract and present this information to users in different modalities
Tier 2 · The gap
Usability & user impact
Where content can meet this criterion and still make things harder for people with disabilities. These are not failures of SC 1.3.6, so raise them as usability defects. Known failures, including failures of related criteria, are listed in Tier 1.
Tools that personalize interfaces for people with cognitive disabilities depend on semantics that most sites don't yet provide.
Tier 3 · The golden path
Recommended best practice
The pattern that meets the floor, closes the gap, and avoids audit disputes. A recommendation, not a requirement.
Use landmark regions, autocomplete tokens and consistent, well-named icons, and follow emerging personalization semantics.
W3C's Understanding document and techniques for SC 1.3.6 ↗ are informative: sufficient techniques show ways to pass, and documented failures show common ways to fail, but neither changes what the criterion requires.
How SC 1.3.6 maps to the WCAG 3 draft
From this site's reviewed map to the WCAG 3 editor's draft. It's an interpretation: W3C has not published a mapping.
No provision in the current draft requires identifying the purpose of components, icons and regions.
From WCAG 2.2, section 5.1: “The main content of WCAG 2.2 is normative and defines requirements that impact conformance claims. Introductory material, appendices, sections marked as "non-normative", diagrams, examples, and notes are informative (non-normative). Non-normative material provides advisory information to help interpret the guidelines but does not create requirements that impact a conformance claim.”