E-mail List Archives
Re: WCAG Violation for use of tabindex=0 on staticelements.
From: Moore,Michael (Accessibility) (HHSC)
Date: Mar 16, 2016 2:25PM
- Next message: Lucy Greco: "Re: WCAG Violation for use of tabindex=0 on static elements."
- Previous message: Jared Smith: "Re: WCAG Violation for use of tabindex=0 on static elements."
- Next message in Thread: Lucy Greco: "Re: WCAG Violation for use of tabindex=0 on static elements."
- Previous message in Thread: Jared Smith: "Re: WCAG Violation for use of tabindex=0 on static elements."
- View all messages in this Thread
Thanks Marc,
I was considering that one but talked myself out of it because the sequence seemed to be correct. It goes left to right from top to bottom. On further reflection though I may be able to argue that the correct sequence is to move logically from active element to active element. The addition of tabindex="0" on inactive elements is interrupting that sequence in a major way.
Mike Moore
Accessibility Coordinator
Texas Health and Human Services Commission
Civil Rights Office
- Next message: Lucy Greco: "Re: WCAG Violation for use of tabindex=0 on static elements."
- Previous message: Jared Smith: "Re: WCAG Violation for use of tabindex=0 on static elements."
- Next message in Thread: Lucy Greco: "Re: WCAG Violation for use of tabindex=0 on static elements."
- Previous message in Thread: Jared Smith: "Re: WCAG Violation for use of tabindex=0 on static elements."
- View all messages in this Thread