-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9.4k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add generic audit for accessible names #11155
Comments
Tracked in dequelabs/axe-core#2421 |
Can be closed once |
@connorjclark #11661 Thanks for following up @eps1lon! |
I'm adding them now. |
Provide a basic description of the audit
Audit if roles that require an accessible name have one (e.g.
dialog
ortree
)How would the audit appear in the report?
title
: Elements have an accessible namefailureTitle
: Elements do not have an accessible namedescription
: When a$ROLE_NAME_HERE
does not have an accessible name screen readers announce it with a generic name, making it unusable for users who rely on screen readers.The documentation should distill https://www.w3.org/TR/wai-aria-practices-1.1/#name_calculation into a format that applies on a per-role basis. The original section is quite complex.
How is this audit different from existing ones?
button-name
only warns on buttonslabel
only on form controlsThough I suspect both just check for existence of the accessible name.
What % of developers/pages will this impact?
I can't make an estimate. Some roles with accessible name required are probably more common (
dialog
) while more complex widgets are likely rarer (such astree
)How is the new audit making a better web for end users?
People using screen readers get a more meaningful announcement when navigating e.g.
dialog
ortree
.What is the resourcing situation?
Would like to help. I guess the biggest problem is that this new rule doesn't interfere with existing naming audits so that users don't get flooded with redundant errors.
Though it might be better to add audits/docs for each role instead.
Any other links or documentation that we should check out?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: