E-mail List Archives
Re: WCAG guideline for too much ARIA
From: Steve Green
Date: Dec 18, 2018 6:07AM
- Next message: Brian Lovely: "Re: [External Sender]WCAG guideline for too much ARIA"
- Previous message: glen walker: "Re: WCAG guideline for too much ARIA"
- Next message in Thread: Brian Lovely: "Re: [External Sender]WCAG guideline for too much ARIA"
- Previous message in Thread: glen walker: "Re: WCAG guideline for too much ARIA"
- View all messages in this Thread
We test a lot of websites, and they fall pretty much into two categories:
a. They have no ARIA at all, even if they need it.
b. They have too much ARIA and it is mostly used incorrectly.
The latter are now the majority, and arguably they are less accessible than the former.
I agree with Glen's comments that you should use the minimum necessary amount of ARIA mark-up. In some cases, the superfluous ARIA causes a WCAG non-compliance, so that clearly needs to be fixed. In other cases, the superfluous ARIA is valid but causes a bad user experience, usually because it results in too much unnecessary waffle. If the developers care about the user experience they will fix it, but I have encountered plenty of them who only care about WCAG compliance and won't fix usability issues like this (unless you tell them it's a WCAG non-compliance even though it isn't).
Steve Green
Managing Director
Test Partners Ltd
- Next message: Brian Lovely: "Re: [External Sender]WCAG guideline for too much ARIA"
- Previous message: glen walker: "Re: WCAG guideline for too much ARIA"
- Next message in Thread: Brian Lovely: "Re: [External Sender]WCAG guideline for too much ARIA"
- Previous message in Thread: glen walker: "Re: WCAG guideline for too much ARIA"
- View all messages in this Thread