WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Interesting article of 10 million pages results for a11y


From: Murphy, Sean
Date: May 22, 2020 10:15PM


Thanks for this. Some of the items you have pointed out I noticed. I just got a feeling the document was for marketing purposes, not to provide an academic research helping in the area of the state of accessibility on the Internet. Just wanted to clarify in case I was miss reading or my gut feel was wrong.


Sean Murphy | Accessibility expert/lead
Digital Accessibility manager
Telstra Digital Channels | Digital Systems
Mobile: 0405 129 739 | Desk: (02) 9866-7917


This email may contain confidential information.
If I've sent it to you by accident, please delete it immediately

-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum < <EMAIL REMOVED> > On Behalf Of Birkir R. Gunnarsson
Sent: Saturday, 23 May 2020 3:17 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Interesting article of 10 million pages results for a11y

[External Email] This email was sent from outside the organisation – be cautious, particularly with links and attachments.

The first line pretty much says that "unlike tools like axe we only test what's visible". Axe does not test things that are hidden.
Also a tool that only tests visible content is not necessarily better, it depends on context.
Their menu requirements are utterly misguided. These are the guys who promise automated fix to pretty much all accessibility issues if you use their plugin service yet have over 20 axe detectable errors on their homepage.
I don't mean to put down any one vendor, we're all aiming for the same goal, and hopefully they are going to learn and improve, but seeing the outrageous claims that are so obviously out of synch not only with WCAG requirements but also user expectations takes the wind out of all their claims, possibly even actually insightful facts.

On 5/22/20, Patrick H. Lauke < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
> On 22/05/2020 11:37, Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
>> On 22/05/2020 11:31, Murphy, Sean wrote:
>>> a friend pointed me to Steve Faulkner blog about this called
>>> Bolt-on Accessibility – 5 gears in reverse
>> Link, for those interested...
>> https://developer.paciellogroup.com/blog/2020/05/bolt-on-accessibilit
>> y-5-gears-in-reverse/
>> P
> Though noting that this is a slightly different topic (the failings of
> those accessibility overlays / toolbars) than the one touched on here
> (the failings of automated tools not being enough to make an actual
> determination about what is and isn't accessible, and their often very
> opinionated/flawed test criteria that are, at best, a weird
> interpretation of the actual far more nuanced WCAG requirements...for
> instance, NOT following an ARIA pattern in terms of its roles and
> keyboard interactions is NOT necessarily a WCAG failure in all situations).
> P
> --
> Patrick H. Lauke
> https://www.splintered.co.uk/ | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
> https://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | https://www.deviantart.com/redux
> twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
> > > archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
> >

Work hard. Have fun. Make history.