mirror of
https://git.sr.ht/~seirdy/seirdy.one
synced 2024-11-14 17:42:09 +00:00
26 lines
1.3 KiB
Markdown
26 lines
1.3 KiB
Markdown
---
|
||
title: "Reflections on the 2022 Web Almanac’s accessibility findings"
|
||
date: 2022-10-10T21:37:52-07:00
|
||
replyURI: "https://almanac.httparchive.org/en/2022/accessibility"
|
||
replyTitle: "Accessibility: The 2022 Web Almnac"
|
||
replyType: "TechArticle"
|
||
replyAuthor: "HTTP Archive"
|
||
replyAuthorURI: "https://httparchive.org/"
|
||
replyAuthorType: "Organization"
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
I have a few thoughts on these findings:
|
||
|
||
1. The Almanac says skip links commonly skip to the `<main>` element; I consider [large focusable containers an anti-pattern]({{<relref "/posts/website-best-practices.md#against-focusable-containers">}}) since they ruin keyboard navigability, and recommend skipping to a heading instead.
|
||
|
||
2. The Almanac identifies accessible live regions by `role="live"`. I'd suggest also looking into `role="feed"`, which represents a common type of live region.
|
||
|
||
Some common accessibility issues I'd be interested in for future editions:
|
||
|
||
- Contrast that's too high
|
||
- Setting custom foregrounds but not custom backgrounds, and vice versa
|
||
- Removing link underlines
|
||
- Focusable containers
|
||
- Using icon fonts without accessible names
|
||
|
||
Overall, it's a good look at the small subset of accessibility issues that are automatically detectable (most of which are far less critical than manually-detectable issues).
|