WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: WebAIM-Forum Digest, Vol 198, Issue 18

for

From: Ramakrishnan Subramanian
Date: Sep 25, 2021 7:22PM

First of all, Thanks all for your responses based on broader aspect of
the Accessibility testing.
"By contrast, if you are doing an "accessibility review" or "assistive
technology testing", then you should indeed report that the input
type="date" element is difficult or impossible to use with Voiceover
and Dragon."
@Steve, in this case will you consider this as a user agent issue or
WCAG violation?
Considering the end goal is to meet the legal requirements like ADA
which do not have its own standard. should the dev be forced to try
fixing these (User agent) issues?



On 9/25/21, <EMAIL REMOVED>
< <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
> Send WebAIM-Forum mailing list submissions to
> <EMAIL REMOVED>
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://list.webaim.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/webaim-forum
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> <EMAIL REMOVED>
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> <EMAIL REMOVED>
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of WebAIM-Forum digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Testing SC 1.4.12 in multiple browsers (Graham Armfield)
> 2. Re: Testing SC 1.4.12 in multiple browsers (Steve Green)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2021 11:11:40 +0100
> From: Graham Armfield < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> To: WebAIM Discussion List < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Testing SC 1.4.12 in multiple browsers
> Message-ID:
> <CAKr-9+nUQs_iZ1APqLzK+ <EMAIL REMOVED> >
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> Wolfgang said...
>
>
>
> *2. Can we blame problems resulting out of bad behavior of browser or
> AT?a) If elements and attributes of HTML, CSS or ARIA are used according to
> the spec, can this ever be considered as failure in an *audit*?*
>
> I think this is a very good question. And in some ways we do have to take
> some view on this when reviewing websites for accessibility.
>
> One example would be the use of input type="date". This input type has been
> in the HTML5 spec for a good few years now, and in many browsers, with many
> ATs it can provide a fully accessible way of allowing users to select a
> date - including a date picker.
>
> But I believe that it's still not really supported in Safari on macOS, and
> it can be a difficult control to interact with when using Dragon
> NaturallySpeaking.
>
> There is an outstanding issue on Apple, but last time I looked there seemed
> to have been no movement. I also contacted Nuance about Dragon and they
> seemed less than interested.
>
> So, if we're reviewing or auditing a site that uses this date input, what's
> the best approach?
>
> Regards
> Graham Armfield
> Coolfields Consulting
>
>
>
> On Fri, 24 Sep 2021, 15:31 , < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>
>> Thanks Glen, a good list for reflection!
>>
>> 1. I just thought of adding 4.1.1 to detect bad behavior of browsers
>> and/or AT by testing with SR.
>>
>> E-g- I remember aria-errormessage to be hardly supported.
>> Would the usage despite support touch 4.1.1?
>>
>> 2. Can we blame problems resulting out of bad behavior of browser or AT?
>>
>> a) If elements and attributes of HTML, CSS or ARIA are used according to
>> the spec, can this ever be considered as failure in an *audit*?
>>
>> b) To which degree do we have to respect bad behavior in a *development
>> process"?
>>
>> Wolfgang
>>
>>
>>