Remove G200, tweak G201 to apply to links and buttons, fix association of the technique with appropriate SCs

[giacomo-petri]

Closes #4043
Closes #4197

EDIT: (@patrickhlauke : having discussed this with @giacomo-petri separately, went ahead to make some more fundamental tweaks here)

• deletes G200 - this "technique" isn't really a technique as such ... it just gives examples of where opening a new window can be considered ok? seems pointless
• removes G201 as advisory technique for 3.2.1 On Focus and 3.2.2 On Input ... as it has nothing to do with either of them; instead it adds it as advisory technique for 3.2.5 Change on Request, and advisory for 2.4.4 Link Purpose (in Context), 2.4.6 Headings and Labels, and 2.4.9 Link Purpose (Link Only)
• tweaks G201 to make it applicable to both links and buttons
• tweaks 3.2.5 Change on Request understanding slightly for consistency/clarity - and renames the folder for the working example, as it's not just a css technique shown there

Making G201 advisory for 2.4.4/2.4.6/2.4.9 hopefully also signals how it's a nice to have for those SCs, but not required (hopefully?), which answers another perennial question i see bubbling up ("there's a link that opens a new window, can i fail it because it doesn't have an icon/text that says it opens in a new window?")

• Preview
• Diff

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for wcag2 ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	626e3a6
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/projects/wcag2/deploys/69a1d2512a339800082d5d74
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-4955--wcag2.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration.

[giacomo-petri]

Hey @kfranqueiro, I'm not allowed to access the logs. Can you please double-check why the preview cannot be deployed?

Thanks

[kfranqueiro]

Hey @kfranqueiro, I'm not allowed to access the logs. Can you please double-check why the preview cannot be deployed?

Thanks

Looks like the spec-generator invocations failed, and looks like the reason why might be a new front-loaded "are you sure?" step that GitHack added. I might need to do something about that separately. This doesn't mean there's anything wrong with the PR.

FYI, I recently added the "Build PR / Run build" check which also performs the build of the informative docs, so if you see that passing, you should be safe. (Doesn't resolve that there's currently no preview though.)

[giacomo-petri]

@patrickhlauke, it looks like the following section may have been accidentally removed:

<div class="note">
            <p>This technique is advisory. While indicating that a link "opens in a new window"
              is considered a good practice, is not required to meet the requirements of any
              particular success criterion.</p>
          </div>

I think restoring it would be helpful, as it clarifies the final note in this issue description.

[patrickhlauke]

as the question came up in #1779 about what the difference is between 3.2.2 On Input and 3.2.5 Change on Request ... for 3.2.2, one way of satisfying the requirements of the SC is to "warn" the user - the user has been advised of the behavior before using the component.

this "if you warn the user, it's not a problem" escape clause is not present in 3.2.5 Change on Request, which demands that you must have a mechanism to prevent unexpected changes of context. for this reason, G201 is not sufficient for 3.2.5, but only advisory.

(note that the clarification about the potential overlap, but also the difference, between 3.2.5 and 3.2.2 that #1779 raises will be dealt with in a separate PR)

[patrickhlauke]

I think restoring it would be helpful

Done (after I initially thought it was sufficient for 3.2.5, but then realised it's advisory for that one too)

[bruce-usab]

Discussed on TF call 27 Feb, keeping in Drafted for now.