WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Landmarks

for

From: Birkir R. Gunnarsson
Date: May 2, 2019 4:23AM

You could pin it un 1.3.1 or 4.1.1 (ARIA is not being used according
to spec, so it feels like 4.1.1 is a valid argument).
I push for people using the big 3 correctly, header/main/footer
(banner/main/contentinfo) but usually stop there, because in my
usability testing I didn't see anyone use landmarks and too many
landmarks on a page quickly render them pretty useless.
Your plague of banner landmarks is probably caused by use of the
<header> element (it maps to the banner role if it is a child of the
<body> element and should only be used in connection with <article> or
<section> elements if not used for the webpage header).
Jaws is overly generous when it comes to mapping the <header> element
to a banner landmark.


On 5/2/19, Steve Green < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
> My view is that it is a violation of 1.3.1 if landmarks are not used or are
> used incorrectly. In most cases I would expect all page content to be in at
> least one landmark - there may be exceptions where that is not appropriate
> but I can't think of any.
>
> Steve Green
> Managing Director
> Test Partners Ltd
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: WebAIM-Forum < <EMAIL REMOVED> > On Behalf Of
> Isabel Holdsworth
> Sent: 02 May 2019 10:23
> To: <EMAIL REMOVED>
> Subject: [WebAIM] Landmarks
>
> Hi all,
>
> I'm currently auditing a web application that uses ARIA landmarks in a very
> random fashion.
>
> I've discovered that using landmarks within a dialog causes JAWS 2018 to say
> nothing but "dialog" when trying to interact with elements using the virtual
> cursor and sometimes the Tab key. So I'll recommend they stop doing this.
>
> On some pages they have a <div role="main"> wrapper around unique page
> content, but they're not using header or footer roles. Is it OK to have some
> content wrapped in landmarks and the rest not? I know that ideally if
> landmarks are to be used at all they should be applied to the whole page,
> but would not doing so constitute a WCAG 2.0 violation?
>
> I've found a few banner landmarks inside main landmarks - do you think this
> would be a fail? If so under which guideline? 1.3.1 perhaps?
>
> Thanks as always, Isabel
> > > http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
> > > > > >


--
Work hard. Have fun. Make history.