Midwest Dev Chat

MidwestDevChat.com github.com/skidvis/Midwest-Dev-Chat

  • The newest 15 messages in the super-cool #a11y channel.

  • 07/18 14:24:13 Rubi: sadparrot

  • 07/18 14:24:28 Rubi: Removing it definitely seems to be a step backward.

  • 07/18 14:24:58 Sherlyn: https://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/2013/10/html5-document-outline/

  • 07/18 14:25:23 Sherlyn: https://www.w3.org/TR/html5/sections.html#outlines

  • 07/18 14:25:40 Sherlyn: Looks like w3 has a warning now

  • 07/19 09:01:11 Sherlyn: @Rubi I do want to mention that I’m glad you are testing for accessibility and that Mutual of Omaha is paying attention to it. slightly_smiling_face I’m sorry that I didn’t have a better answer in this specific case.

  • 07/19 09:02:38 Rubi: Thanks, we appreciate it. And don’t sweat it. The one issue I have with what you brought forth is that the Paciello Group article is from 2014 (last comment left in 2015, and mentioned JAWS 15. Current JAWS is 18.

  • 07/19 09:04:04 Rubi: A lot _may_ have changed since then, but I’m not seeing much about it. It’s still in the spec, and my skimming didn’t tell me where it may be removed, so I assume it’s still a stable option going forward. That said, if a stable option fell in the forest, and no one was around to to build support for it, could I stretch this metaphor any thinner?

  • 07/19 09:05:09 Rubi: Regardless, I do appreciate it. Any extra info is helpful.

  • 07/19 09:11:38 Sherlyn: I suppose it is less of a screen reader issue, and more of a browser implementation issue.

  • 07/19 09:11:45 Sherlyn: Open bug for chrome: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=365070

  • 07/19 09:20:42 Sherlyn: Here is a w3c issue about it with comments from last year https://github.com/w3c/html/issues/169

  • 07/19 09:21:41 Sherlyn: And the 5.1 spec was changed to provide better examples of how to implement it, and retains a warning about user agent implementation https://www.w3.org/TR/html51/sections.html#headings-and-sections

  • 07/19 09:40:18 Sherlyn: So, because the feature isn’t implemented, it fails to meet the WCAG standard of “Accessibility Supported”, which is why most automated tools fail it. However, my personal opinion and experience tells me that this isn’t a problem that warrants an immediate fix. The outline likely won’t prevent anyone from using the site and will be more of an inconvenience than anything. It is really up to you to determine whether or it is important to fix right now.

  • 07/19 11:56:02 Larry: has joined the channel

  • *Usernames have been changed to protect the innocent.

Check out all the cool channels!

Join the conversation!