WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Thread: Landmarks

for

Number of posts in this thread: 9 (In chronological order)

From: Swift, Daniel P.
Date: Tue, Jan 14 2020 10:52AM
Subject: Landmarks
No previous message | Next message →

I'm a little late getting into landmarks. I have a follow-up question to this thread. Is it redundant and unnecessary to include both the landmark and the HTML5 element? For example, is there any harm (from a SR perspective or otherwise) of using <header role="banner"> or <main role="main"> for instance? In my reading, it seems like redundancy is okay, but I know that from past experience, having the SR repeat the same things multiple times is obviously a bad thing.

Thanks!

Dan Swift
Senior Web Specialist
University Communications and Marketing
West Chester University
610.738.0589

-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Birkir R. Gunnarsson
Sent: Thursday, May 2, 2019 6:23 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Landmarks

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 ADDRESS 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 ADDRESS REMOVED = > On Behalf Of
> Isabel Holdsworth
> Sent: 02 May 2019 10:23
> To: = EMAIL ADDRESS 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
> > > archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
> > > > archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
> >


--
Work hard. Have fun. Make history.

From: Birkir R. Gunnarsson
Date: Tue, Jan 14 2020 11:06AM
Subject: Re: Landmarks
← Previous message | Next message →

For these particular landmarks I don't see the risk, in fact it may be
good to reinforce the HTML5 elements with the appropriate ARIA
landmark attribute.


On 1/14/20, Swift, Daniel P. < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> I'm a little late getting into landmarks. I have a follow-up question to
> this thread. Is it redundant and unnecessary to include both the landmark
> and the HTML5 element? For example, is there any harm (from a SR
> perspective or otherwise) of using <header role="banner"> or <main
> role="main"> for instance? In my reading, it seems like redundancy is okay,
> but I know that from past experience, having the SR repeat the same things
> multiple times is obviously a bad thing.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Dan Swift
> Senior Web Specialist
> University Communications and Marketing
> West Chester University
> 610.738.0589
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf
> Of Birkir R. Gunnarsson
> Sent: Thursday, May 2, 2019 6:23 AM
> To: WebAIM Discussion List < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Landmarks
>
> 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 ADDRESS 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 ADDRESS REMOVED = > On Behalf Of
>> Isabel Holdsworth
>> Sent: 02 May 2019 10:23
>> To: = EMAIL ADDRESS 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
>> >> >> archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
>> >> >> >> archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
>> >>
>
>
> --
> Work hard. Have fun. Make history.
> > > http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
> >
> > > > >


--
Work hard. Have fun. Make history.

From: Swift, Daniel P.
Date: Tue, Jan 14 2020 12:44PM
Subject: Re: Landmarks
← Previous message | Next message →

Awesome - thanks for the feedback, Birkir!

Dan Swift
Senior Web Specialist
University Communications and Marketing
West Chester University
610.738.0589

-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Birkir R. Gunnarsson
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 1:07 PM
To: WebAIM Discussion List < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Landmarks

For these particular landmarks I don't see the risk, in fact it may be good to reinforce the HTML5 elements with the appropriate ARIA landmark attribute.


On 1/14/20, Swift, Daniel P. < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> I'm a little late getting into landmarks. I have a follow-up question
> to this thread. Is it redundant and unnecessary to include both the
> landmark and the HTML5 element? For example, is there any harm (from
> a SR perspective or otherwise) of using <header role="banner"> or
> <main role="main"> for instance? In my reading, it seems like
> redundancy is okay, but I know that from past experience, having the
> SR repeat the same things multiple times is obviously a bad thing.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Dan Swift
> Senior Web Specialist
> University Communications and Marketing West Chester University
> 610.738.0589
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On
> Behalf Of Birkir R. Gunnarsson
> Sent: Thursday, May 2, 2019 6:23 AM
> To: WebAIM Discussion List < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Landmarks
>
> 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 ADDRESS 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 ADDRESS REMOVED = > On Behalf
>> Of Isabel Holdsworth
>> Sent: 02 May 2019 10:23
>> To: = EMAIL ADDRESS 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
>> >> >> archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
>> >> >> >> archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
>> >>
>
>
> --
> Work hard. Have fun. Make history.
> > > archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
> >
> > > archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
> >


--
Work hard. Have fun. Make history.

From: Christine Hogenkamp
Date: Tue, Jan 14 2020 12:46PM
Subject: Re: Landmarks
← Previous message | Next message →

For what it's worth, I just happened to test this in NVDA, and if the
landmark doesn't have role="main" etc used, it doesn't show up in the
Elements List section for Landmarks. It may seem redundant to have both
but does appear necessary/not redundant for some assistive devices.

--
*Christine Hogenkamp*
Front-end Developer

CONTEXT CREATIVE
317 ADELAIDE ST. W., #500 | TORONTO, ON CANADA | M5V 1P9
<https://maps.google.com/?q=317+ADELAIDE+ST.+W.,+%23500%C2%A0+%7C%C2%A0+TORONTO,+ON+CANADA%C2%A0+%7C%C2%A0+M5V+1P9&entry=gmail&source=g>

On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 2:02 PM < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
wrote:

>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: "Swift, Daniel P." < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> To: WebAIM Discussion List < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> Cc:
> Bcc:
> Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2020 17:52:56 +0000
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Landmarks
> I'm a little late getting into landmarks. I have a follow-up question to
> this thread. Is it redundant and unnecessary to include both the landmark
> and the HTML5 element? For example, is there any harm (from a SR
> perspective or otherwise) of using <header role="banner"> or <main
> role="main"> for instance? In my reading, it seems like redundancy is
> okay, but I know that from past experience, having the SR repeat the same
> things multiple times is obviously a bad thing.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Dan Swift
> Senior Web Specialist
> University Communications and Marketing
> West Chester University
> 610.738.0589
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On
> Behalf Of Birkir R. Gunnarsson
> Sent: Thursday, May 2, 2019 6:23 AM
> To: WebAIM Discussion List < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Landmarks
>
> 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 ADDRESS 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 ADDRESS REMOVED = > On Behalf Of
> > Isabel Holdsworth
> > Sent: 02 May 2019 10:23
> > To: = EMAIL ADDRESS 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
> > > > > > archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
> > > > > > > > archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
> > > >
>
>

From: Greg Jellin
Date: Tue, Jan 14 2020 12:57PM
Subject: Re: Landmarks
← Previous message | Next message →

Christine,

Are you saying that if the landmark doesn't have a role=main in addition
to the native HTML <main> it doesn't show up in the elements list for
NVDA? I just tested and <main> was sufficient to be included in the
elements list, as was <main role="main"> and <div role="main">. All
three of those behaved the same for me. Note, I used Chrome for this.
What browser are you seeing this on?

Greg

On 1/14/2020 11:46 AM, Christine Hogenkamp wrote:
> For what it's worth, I just happened to test this in NVDA, and if the
> landmark doesn't have role="main" etc used, it doesn't show up in the
> Elements List section for Landmarks. It may seem redundant to have both
> but does appear necessary/not redundant for some assistive devices.
>

From: Guy Hickling
Date: Tue, Jan 14 2020 1:38PM
Subject: Re: Landmarks
← Previous message | Next message →

On the one hand, adding the role attributes causes the double announcements
you mention; not terribly important but it does detract from a clean
rendition of the page. It also complicates the markup for developers, and
we want to encourage developers to use landmarks without making them
unnecessarily complicated - I think developer usability is quite an
important consideration.

And on the other hand, this practice was started only for backwards
compatibility with earlier browser and assistive device versions that did
not handle the new HTML5 elements. But browsers and screen readers have
been recognising them for enough years now; HTML5 and these elements became
a recommendation six years ago in 2014, and browsers were quick to take
them on board.

So it seems to me this practice of adding role attributes is no longer
necessary. Certainly I have stopped recommending it in audit reports.
Anyone still using a screen reader version old enough to not recognise
these elements will be missing far more important stuff than landmarks! -
quite a lot of ARIA, for instance. But if anyone knows of screen readers
that old still being used, please correct me.

Regards,
Guy Hickling

From: Murphy, Sean
Date: Tue, Jan 14 2020 3:22PM
Subject: Re: Landmarks
← Previous message | Next message →

I agree and can introduce problems with users trying to understand what is going on where they are not experienced users with Web. There is a lot of folks like this.

Sean

-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > On Behalf Of Swift, Daniel P.
Sent: Wednesday, 15 January 2020 4:53 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Landmarks

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

I'm a little late getting into landmarks. I have a follow-up question to this thread. Is it redundant and unnecessary to include both the landmark and the HTML5 element? For example, is there any harm (from a SR perspective or otherwise) of using <header role="banner"> or <main role="main"> for instance? In my reading, it seems like redundancy is okay, but I know that from past experience, having the SR repeat the same things multiple times is obviously a bad thing.

Thanks!

Dan Swift
Senior Web Specialist
University Communications and Marketing
West Chester University
610.738.0589

-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Birkir R. Gunnarsson
Sent: Thursday, May 2, 2019 6:23 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Landmarks

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 ADDRESS 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 ADDRESS REMOVED = > On Behalf Of
> Isabel Holdsworth
> Sent: 02 May 2019 10:23
> To: = EMAIL ADDRESS 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
> > > archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
> > > > archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
> >


--
Work hard. Have fun. Make history.

From: glen walker
Date: Tue, Jan 14 2020 3:34PM
Subject: Re: Landmarks
← Previous message | Next message →

I've never heard a landmark read twice just because you have a redundant
role on the html element. Note that the official HTML specs say to *not*
set the role if you want the default. For example,
https://www.w3.org/TR/html53/grouping-content.html#the-main-element.

"Allowed ARIA role attribute values: main role (default - do not set). "

As far as landmarks not showing up in NVDA's landmarks dialog, that can
happen for region landmarks if the landmark does not have an aria-label.

Side note on aria-label support,
https://www.w3.org/TR/using-aria/#label-support. The second bullet point
says that aria-label isn't well supported on region landmarks (<section>
elements) but I haven't experienced that.

From: Bossley, Peter A.
Date: Tue, Jan 14 2020 7:30PM
Subject: Re: Landmarks
← Previous message | No next message

Adding a role to a native element that already inherits that role should not cause double reading. Where I see that double reading issue most often is where a container element nested inside the native role has the additional duplicated role assigned to it. I'm not sure the double specification is really necessary with modern browsers and AT, but if you want to make sure it wouldn't be an issue putting an example together and using an API inspector should be able to show you what the accessibility tree from the browser is actually exposing. I find this useful when I can't figure out, after code/DOM inspection, if a screen reader is misbehaving or if it is the browser.

-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > On Behalf Of Swift, Daniel P.
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 2:44 PM
To: WebAIM Discussion List < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Landmarks

Awesome - thanks for the feedback, Birkir!

Dan Swift
Senior Web Specialist
University Communications and Marketing
West Chester University
610.738.0589

-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Birkir R. Gunnarsson
Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2020 1:07 PM
To: WebAIM Discussion List < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Landmarks

For these particular landmarks I don't see the risk, in fact it may be good to reinforce the HTML5 elements with the appropriate ARIA landmark attribute.


On 1/14/20, Swift, Daniel P. < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> I'm a little late getting into landmarks. I have a follow-up question
> to this thread. Is it redundant and unnecessary to include both the
> landmark and the HTML5 element? For example, is there any harm (from
> a SR perspective or otherwise) of using <header role="banner"> or
> <main role="main"> for instance? In my reading, it seems like
> redundancy is okay, but I know that from past experience, having the
> SR repeat the same things multiple times is obviously a bad thing.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Dan Swift
> Senior Web Specialist
> University Communications and Marketing West Chester University
> 610.738.0589
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On
> Behalf Of Birkir R. Gunnarsson
> Sent: Thursday, May 2, 2019 6:23 AM
> To: WebAIM Discussion List < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Landmarks
>
> 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 ADDRESS 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 ADDRESS REMOVED = > On Behalf
>> Of Isabel Holdsworth
>> Sent: 02 May 2019 10:23
>> To: = EMAIL ADDRESS 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
>> >> >> archives at https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://webaim.org/discussion/archives__;!!KGKeukY!gY8RAZJ8b5J1dNLb_Z8eo9-2WE4f5lCQtWbM8xciP-ep6LXOsHadd_1lCgfdPuv0FA$
>> >> >> >> archives at https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://webaim.org/discussion/archives__;!!KGKeukY!gY8RAZJ8b5J1dNLb_Z8eo9-2WE4f5lCQtWbM8xciP-ep6LXOsHadd_1lCgfdPuv0FA$
>> >>
>
>
> --
> Work hard. Have fun. Make history.
> > > archives at https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://webaim.org/discussion/archives__;!!KGKeukY!gY8RAZJ8b5J1dNLb_Z8eo9-2WE4f5lCQtWbM8xciP-ep6LXOsHadd_1lCgfdPuv0FA$
> >
> > > archives at https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://webaim.org/discussion/archives__;!!KGKeukY!gY8RAZJ8b5J1dNLb_Z8eo9-2WE4f5lCQtWbM8xciP-ep6LXOsHadd_1lCgfdPuv0FA$
> >


--
Work hard. Have fun. Make history.