WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Honeypots & SC 1.3.1

for

From: wolfgang.berndorfer@zweiterblick.at
Date: Apr 19, 2023 9:37AM


Thank you, Patrick, for your estimation!

There were no more concerns, so I’d sum up:

1. If a component (e.g., a honeypot) is intended to be generally hidden, is visually hidden, then it also must be hidden for SR.
2. If not hidden for SR accordingly, Sc 1.3.1 is violated at least mildly.

Wolfgang

-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum < <EMAIL REMOVED> > On Behalf Of Patrick H. Lauke
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2023 11:59 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Honeypots & SC 1.3.1

I'd say yes, it's a (mild) 1.3.1 failure.

P
--
Patrick H. Lauke

https://www.splintered.co.uk/ / https://github.com/patrickhlauke / https://codepen.io/patrickhlauke https://flickr.com/photos/redux/ / https://www.deviantart.com/redux https://mastodon.social/@patrick_h_lauke


------ Original Message ------
From <EMAIL REMOVED>
To "'WebAIM Discussion List'" < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
Date 17/04/2023 10:29:23
Subject [WebAIM] Honeypots & SC 1.3.1

>What looks like a heading must also have the technical representation of a
>heading for SR. This is an example of SC 1.3.1 conformance.
>
>
>
>But does SC 1.3.1 also include:
>
>What is intended to be hidden visually must also be technically hidden?
>
>I'm not talking about sr-only Information off-screen, but:
>
>
>
>A honeypot to identify spambots is positioned off-screen, not with display:
>none via CSS.
>
>Thus, the input field is present for Sr.
>
>
>
>Is this a failure of 1.3.1?
>
>
>
>Thanks, Wolfgang
>
>
>
>>>>