Dragging Movements
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
Functionality that uses dragging can also be done with a single pointer without dragging, unless dragging is essential or the browser provides the functionality and the author hasn't modified it.
Normative text
Verbatim from WCAG 2.2, W3C Recommendation 12 December 2024. Underlined terms are defined below.
All functionality that uses a dragging movement for operation can be achieved by a single pointer without dragging, unless dragging is essential or the functionality is determined by the user agent and not modified by the author.
Not required by the normative text
Common claims that this criterion does not support. Don't log these as WCAG failures.
- A keyboard alternative. That's 2.1.1; this asks for a single-pointer alternative such as tap-to-select then tap-to-place.
- Alternatives to path-based gestures. That's 2.5.1.
Definitions used (5)
Glossary definitions are normative. Their notes are informative.
- functionality
-
processes and outcomes achievable through user action
- dragging movement
-
an operation where the pointer engages with an element on the down-event and the element (or a representation of its position) follows the pointer until an up-event
Informative notes (1)
Examples of draggable elements include list items, text elements, and images.
- single pointer
-
an input modality that only targets a single point on the page/screen at a time – such as a mouse, single finger on a touch screen, or stylus.
Informative notes (1)
Single pointer interactions include clicks, double clicks, taps, dragging motions, and single-finger swipe gestures. In contrast, multipoint interactions involve the use of two or more pointers at the same time, such as two-finger interactions on a touchscreen, or the simultaneous use of a mouse and stylus.
- essential
-
if removed, would fundamentally change the information or functionality of the content, and information and functionality cannot be achieved in another way that would conform
- user agent
-
any software that retrieves and presents web content for users
Notes in the criterion Informative
WCAG 2.2 lists notes among its informative material, which "does not create requirements that impact a conformance claim." They help interpret the criterion but are not part of the floor.
This requirement applies to web content that interprets pointer actions (i.e., this does not apply to actions that are required to operate the user agent or assistive technology).
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 2.5.7, so raise them as usability defects. Known failures, including failures of related criteria, are listed in Tier 1.
An alternative that takes many taps, or sits in an overflow menu, technically passes but is tiring for people with motor impairments.
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.
Pair drag-and-drop with visible controls, such as move up and move down buttons or a "Move to…" menu.
W3C's Understanding document and techniques for SC 2.5.7 ↗ 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 2.5.7 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.
Successor provisions
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.”