WebAxe, to accessibility
@WebAxe@a11y.info avatar
deconspray, to accessibility
@deconspray@mastodon.social avatar

Key highlights from the WebAIM Million 2023 report show that of the 1 million home pages tested, 96.3% of home pages had detected WCAG failures. We should be ashamed of ourselves.

https://uxdesign.cc/we-should-all-be-ashamed-of-the-web-webaims-2023-accessibility-report-5233c8583dd9

eric, to webdev
@eric@social.coop avatar
alan42, to accessibility
@alan42@mastodon.social avatar

So duplicate IDs (F77) no longer mean a WCAG fail as they refer to 4.1.1 (obsolete)?

I thought I had read duplicate IDs still fail, even though 411 is obsolete..?

SteveFaulkner, to random
@SteveFaulkner@mastodon.social avatar

in action, when will the liberals stop trying to shut independent thought down?

https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/3709

SteveFaulkner, to accessibility
@SteveFaulkner@mastodon.social avatar
kubikpixel, to webdev German
@kubikpixel@chaos.social avatar

Web Content Accessibility Guidelines

Mal ehrlich, über hatte ich mich noch zu wenig auseinandergesetzt aber auch grosse so wie Firmen setzten dies selten um. Ich sehe sehr selten Seiten im , die dies in ihrem berücksichtigen oder täusche ich mich?
Klar es benötigt ua einen gewissen Aufwand aber evt kann mensch es kaum logisch verrechnen, wie von erwünscht nehme ich mal an.

👓 https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_Content_Accessibility_Guidelines
👉 https://www.w3.org/Translations/WCAG20-de/

yatil, to random
@yatil@yatil.social avatar

Speak after me:

SC 2.4.6 Headings and Labels (Level AA) does not require headings or labels. It just requires that headings and labels that are present describe the content.

This catches so many testers off-guard, and the Understanding’s “in brief” section does also a bad job of clarifying this.

https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Understanding/headings-and-labels.html

WebAxe, to accessibility
@WebAxe@a11y.info avatar

New York State Will Require Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.2 for State and County Websites https://equalentry.com/accessibility-guidelines-new-york/

LRL, to accessibility
@LRL@toot.community avatar

How do you get people to sign up for paid stuff on your site? You write a so called simplified version of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG), which at best is so simplistic it misses out crucial information, to worst being completely wrong. And say it’s FREE.

TetraLogical, to random
@TetraLogical@a11y.social avatar

The Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) officially evolved from 2.1 to 2.2 late last year, introducing crucial updates and nine new success criteria.

We run instructor-led training tailored for teams of all sizes and backgrounds to help your organisation integrate these updates into your workflow:

Getting started with WCAG 2.2 training: https://tetralogical.com/services/instructor-led-training/

TetraLogical,
@TetraLogical@a11y.social avatar

Our instructors are active members of various WCAG working groups, have decades of knowledge, and are experienced at creating and delivering training.

For an idea of what to expect, read What's new in WCAG 2.2: https://tetralogical.com/blog/2023/10/05/whats-new-wcag-2.2/ and our WCAG 2.2 primer: https://tetralogical.com/blog/2020/04/10/wcag-primer

WebAxe, to accessibility
@WebAxe@a11y.info avatar

@aardrian Well this is good; counterpart to the tools mega list. "Selecting Web Accessibility Evaluation Tools", draft by WAI: https://www.w3.org/WAI/test-evaluate/tools/selecting/

patrick_h_lauke, to accessibility
@patrick_h_lauke@mastodon.social avatar

a timely reminder to put things into context: annoyed that a particular success criterion, glossary definition, technique etc doesn't cover your specific situation you're facing? keep in mind that the majority of WCAG 2.x was written almost 25 years ago (!)

you're trying to apply thinking and rules to your work today that were dreamt up a quarter of a century ago...

(damn, i feel old)

patrick_h_lauke, to accessibility
@patrick_h_lauke@mastodon.social avatar

some days*, it's really tiring arguing over interpretations of badly written, vague, misleading, handwavy, obscure criteria ...

  • every day
SteveFaulkner, to accessibility
@SteveFaulkner@mastodon.social avatar

Doing what’s required: Indicating mandatory fields in an accessible way

💦 juice from @davidofyork

"It is important to make users aware of required fields upfront. This should prevent them from making submission errors and having to backtrack through a form to fix such errors. But what is the best and most accessible way to indicate required fields? This article aims to explain exactly what’s required."

https://www.tpgi.com/doing-whats-required-indicating-mandatory-fields-in-an-accessible-way/

WebAxe, to accessibility
@WebAxe@a11y.info avatar

These (still) aren't the SCs you're looking for…(mis)adventures in WCAG 2.x interpretation and audits

https://patrickhlauke.github.io/wcag-interpretation/

Patrick Lauke poses tough questions, and guidance, on testing for WCAG.

ayeayerobot, to accessibility

Here's a question for my web accessibility folks: are label elements without associated controls harmful? Say they're paired with static content (text in a div). Should the static content have an aria-labeledby attribute or just leave it be?

WebAxe, to CA
@WebAxe@a11y.info avatar

"California is considering adopting a new law (AB-1757) that adopts Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 level AA ...it also expands liability to third-party developers and gives people with disabilities and businesses the ability to sue web developers for creating websites that do not conform"

https://equalentry.com/website-accessibility-california-assembly-bill/

caztcha, to random
@caztcha@fedibird.com avatar

In WCAG 2.2, I found a term "encloses" in Glossary section, with no links from anywhere in WCAG success criteria. I wonder what does this term means. The description only says "solidly bounds or surrounds".

patrick_h_lauke,
@patrick_h_lauke@mastodon.social avatar

@caztcha i believe this was set up for an earlier version of https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG22/#focus-appearance - note 1 still has a remnant of this as well with its "encloses"

patrick_h_lauke,
@patrick_h_lauke@mastodon.social avatar

@yatil @caztcha "it looks like someone forgot to update " is my life in a nutshell

benteh, to accessibility

help: a question to all visually impaired: do you know of datavisualisation libraries that works well / good / terrible?

Please retoot :)

@jakobrosin

?

mstankiewicz, to fediverse Polish
@mstankiewicz@pol.social avatar

Ah, z przyzwyczajenia pochwaliłem się tym tylko na , zapominając o . Więc nadrabiam!
Uzyskałem certyfikat ukończenia kursu WCAG, czyli (w skrócie) dostępności cyfrowej (tak, dla osób niepełnosprawnych) stron internetowych i aplikacji.
Poświadczenie: https://platforma.strefakursow.pl/p/certificate/hash/d7102ahbquosc8c88ks44w0g8sw8g4

eric, to random
@eric@disabled.social avatar

Oh cool. I'm looking into stuff I only ever glanced over and I have a question.

more of a remark.

Ha ha.

eric,
@eric@disabled.social avatar

Anyway, the understanding conformance page has links to fragment identifiers that do not exist because those parts are copied and pasted (but maybe a technology with a fancier name than that was relied upon) verbatim from the recommendation.

Hire fucking people to do your fucking proofreading.

markwyner, to UX
@markwyner@mas.to avatar

We really need to do away with this type of authentication.

The tests are often ambiguous. More importantly, they don’t meet accessibility requirements noted in WCAG 2.2. Specifically section 3.3.8 on “cognitive function tests”:

https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Understanding/accessible-authentication-minimum.html

Take this example here. Does “direction of” mean mirror the hand or point toward the hand?

Even neurotypical people could be confused by this.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • JUstTest
  • khanakhh
  • kavyap
  • thenastyranch
  • everett
  • tacticalgear
  • rosin
  • Durango
  • DreamBathrooms
  • mdbf
  • magazineikmin
  • InstantRegret
  • Youngstown
  • slotface
  • megavids
  • ethstaker
  • ngwrru68w68
  • cisconetworking
  • modclub
  • tester
  • osvaldo12
  • cubers
  • GTA5RPClips
  • normalnudes
  • Leos
  • provamag3
  • anitta
  • lostlight
  • All magazines