E-mail List Archives

Search E-mail List Archives for

Number of posts in this thread: 13 (In chronological order)

From: Angela French
Date: Wed, Nov 30 2016 12:17PM
Subject: why don't accessibility checkers find non-distinguishable links?
No previous message | Next message →

Can anyone tell me why accessibility checkers would not be finding Non-distinguishable links?
Our CMS uses achecker and it doesn't find them. WAVE doesn't either. We are piloting Siteimprove and it found 143 page with them. Ugh.



Angela French
Internet/Intranet Specialist
Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges
360-704-4316
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = <mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
www.sbctc.edu<;http://www.sbctc.edu/>;

From: Jonathan Avila
Date: Wed, Nov 30 2016 12:27PM
Subject: Re: why don't accessibility checkers find non-distinguishablelinks?
← Previous message | Next message →

> Can anyone tell me why accessibility checkers would not be finding Non-distinguishable links?

You can use table headers to meet SC 2.4.4

H79: Identifying the purpose of a link in a data table using the link text combined with its enclosing table cell and associated table header cells

Jonathan


Jonathan Avila
Chief Accessibility Officer
SSB BART Group
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
703.637.8957 (Office)
Vis Visit us online: Website | Twitter | Facebook | LinkedIn | Blog
Don't miss Trends in Accessibility & Electronic Documents on Wed 12/7!

The information contained in this transmission may be attorney privileged and/or confidential information intended for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.

From: Moore,Michael (Accessibility) (HHSC)
Date: Wed, Nov 30 2016 12:28PM
Subject: Re: why don't accessibility checkers find non-distinguishablelinks?
← Previous message | Next message →

In my opinion it should flag as a manual check under 2.4.4 for AA compliance and should only fail automated checks under 2.4.9 which is at the AAA conformance level. You may want to confirm that the tool is configured for the level of conformance that you are seeking and that it did not flag a manual check. Whenever you deploy a new tool you can expect to get flagged for a large number of manual checks and you will also find some stuff that is just noise. This is not a bad thing - if it was completely automatic I would probably be flipping burgers...

Mike Moore
Accessibility Coordinator
Texas Health and Human Services Commission
Civil Rights Office
(512) 438-3431 (Office)

From: Birkir R. Gunnarsson
Date: Wed, Nov 30 2016 12:30PM
Subject: Re: why don't accessibility checkers find non-distinguishable links?
← Previous message | Next message →

Angela
Do you mean non-distinguishable links in a text block (violation of
1.4.1), or do you mean links pointing to different places with
identical link text and no programmatically determined context
(2.4.4)?
I did a recent test of SiteImprove and found that it reported a
surprising amount of false positives (including the fact that it
reports WCAG 2.0 A, AA and AAA issues by default and only your
project administrator can customize to exclude AAA).
Not dizzing a tool here, just pointing this out as a possible
explanation for what you are seeing, and that you should carefully
verify whether this is a real problem or a false positive.





On 11/30/16, Angela French < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> Can anyone tell me why accessibility checkers would not be finding
> Non-distinguishable links?
> Our CMS uses achecker and it doesn't find them. WAVE doesn't either. We
> are piloting Siteimprove and it found 143 page with them. Ugh.
>
>
>
> Angela French
> Internet/Intranet Specialist
> Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges
> 360-704-4316
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = <mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> www.sbctc.edu<;http://www.sbctc.edu/>;
>
> > > > >


--
Work hard. Have fun. Make history.

From: Angela French
Date: Wed, Nov 30 2016 12:48PM
Subject: Re: why don't accessibility checkers find non-distinguishable links?
← Previous message | Next message →

I mean two exactly worded links that go to different places. Here is a great example. I'm trying to determine the best way to restructure the page. http://www.sbctc.edu/colleges-staff/my-employment/faculty-salary-surveys.aspx

From: Jonathan Avila
Date: Wed, Nov 30 2016 12:51PM
Subject: Re: why don't accessibility checkers find non-distinguishable links?
← Previous message | Next message →

> http://www.sbctc.edu/colleges-staff/my-employment/faculty-salary-surveys.aspx

In the case of this survey page you would need to add to the links to meet SC 2.4.4 as there is nothing in the list, sentence, or paragraph to aid the user with the context. Aria-label would help screen reader users.

Jonathan

Jonathan Avila
Chief Accessibility Officer
SSB BART Group
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
703.637.8957 (Office)
Vis Visit us online: Website | Twitter | Facebook | LinkedIn | Blog
Don't miss Trends in Accessibility & Electronic Documents on Wed 12/7!

The information contained in this transmission may be attorney privileged and/or confidential information intended for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.

From: Angela French
Date: Wed, Nov 30 2016 1:01PM
Subject: Re: why don't accessibility checkers find non-distinguishable links?
← Previous message | Next message →

Unfortunately, our CMS doesn't support ARIA. I'm trying to come up with solutions that our web editors can make use of.

From: Angela French
Date: Wed, Nov 30 2016 1:05PM
Subject: Re: why don't accessibility checkers find non-distinguishable links?
← Previous message | Next message →

Would you say these blog tags fail because they are in a <div>, but are not wrapped in a <p> tag? http://www.sbctc.edu/blogs/news-links/default.aspx?page=5&;limit=4

From: Jared Smith
Date: Wed, Nov 30 2016 11:10PM
Subject: Re: why don't accessibility checkers find non-distinguishable links?
← Previous message | Next message →

WAVE doesn't fail this as an error because there is very minimal user
impact - and that impact is hardly worse for people with disabilities
than anyone else. And the example you provided is not a WCAG AA
failure anyway because the headings provides programmatic context for
the links.

Any tool that indicates a WCAG failure for any two links with the same
text that go to different places is being very creative in its
interpretation of WCAG.

Jared

From: Jon Brundage
Date: Fri, Dec 02 2016 8:31AM
Subject: Re: why don't accessibility checkers find non-distinguishable links?
← Previous message | Next message →

Hi Jared-

So this would be acceptable? -

<heading>2015 documents</heading>
<href> privacy </href>
<href>security</href>

<heading>2016 documents</heading>
<href> privacy </href>
<href>security</href>

I've always thought that links that have the same link text but different
destinations must be made unique. It seems that even with the context of the
headers when put into the links list they would not be easily
distinguishable.

Thanks,

Jon

From: Jared Smith
Date: Fri, Dec 02 2016 9:12AM
Subject: Re: why don't accessibility checkers find non-distinguishable links?
← Previous message | Next message →

Jon Brundage wrote:

>
> So this would be acceptable?

For screen reader users who are navigating by links, this presentation
is perhaps (at most) slightly better:

<href>2015 documents privacy</href>
<href>2015 documents security</href>
<href>2016 documents privacy</href>
<href>2016 documents security</href>

... but this presentation is notably worse for everyone else
(including for screen reader users reading through the page). So which
should you favor? I can't answer that, but I'm not really comfortable
with an accessibility technique that decreases usability for more
users than it benefits.

Jared

From: Jonathan Avila
Date: Fri, Dec 02 2016 9:32AM
Subject: Re: why don't accessibility checkers find non-distinguishable links?
← Previous message | Next message →

> For screen reader users who are navigating by links, this presentation is perhaps (at most) slightly better:

Perhaps an aria-describedby approach is best because it is generally announced on tab and not on arrows in browse mode and announced after the normal link text and doesn't clutter the virtual view or visual presentation.

Jonathan

Jonathan Avila
Chief Accessibility Officer
SSB BART Group 
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
703.637.8957 (Office)

Visit us online: Website | Twitter | Facebook | LinkedIn | Blog
Don't miss Trends in Accessibility & Electronic Documents on Wed 12/7!

The information contained in this transmission may be attorney privileged and/or confidential information intended for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.

From: Moore,Michael (Accessibility) (HHSC)
Date: Fri, Dec 02 2016 9:57AM
Subject: Re: why don't accessibility checkers find non-distinguishable links?
← Previous message | No next message

Jon Brundage wrote:

>
> So this would be acceptable?

For screen reader users who are navigating by links, this presentation is perhaps (at most) slightly better:

<href>2015 documents privacy</href>
<href>2015 documents security</href>
<href>2016 documents privacy</href>
<href>2016 documents security</href>

... but this presentation is notably worse for everyone else (including for screen reader users reading through the page). So which should you favor? I can't answer that, but I'm not really comfortable with an accessibility technique that decreases usability for more users than it benefits.

Jared

I think this is the reason that having links make sense out of context is a WCAG AAA requirement rather than a AA. As with many if not most of the AAA requirements there is a significant danger of doing more harm than good and developers must carefully consider the implications before implementing them. In the example above perhaps the real problem is information architecture.

What would be wrong with the following links?

<href>Privacy Documents</href>
<href>Security Documents</href>
<href>Privacy and Security Document Archives</href>