E-mail List Archives

Search E-mail List Archives for

Number of posts in this thread: 8 (In chronological order)

From: Vaibhav Saraf
Date: Sat, Aug 15 2020 10:19AM
Subject: Doubts regarding website logo
No previous message | Next message →

Hi Everyone,

I was auditing a website where on the login page they had programmed the
logo to be a button and a heading level 1.

On all other pages the logo was programmed as a button so I had failed it
for coonsistent identification.

But I had this particular doubt for treating the logo as a <h1>, after
login for a specific group the website redirects to one deployed on a
sub-domain, on all of the pages in the sub-domain the logo is marked as
<h1>.

From a WCAG point of view and the correct use of headings I seek your
opinion on this matter.

Also I happened to notice similar behaviour on a corporate social media
website, am I allowed to take names here? (its not my client)


Thanks,
Vaibhav

From: Vaibhav Saraf
Date: Sat, Aug 15 2020 10:25AM
Subject: Re: Doubts regarding website logo
← Previous message | Next message →

Also I have marked it as an improper use of role button, but my concern is
regarding if the use of <h1> is advisable or not. I sat with the usability
lead of my team and he regarded this as a bug, but I want to consider all
the opinions after spotting on a well accessible website.



On Sat, 15 Aug 2020 at 21:49, Vaibhav Saraf < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:

> Hi Everyone,
>
> I was auditing a website where on the login page they had programmed the
> logo to be a button and a heading level 1.
>
> On all other pages the logo was programmed as a button so I had failed it
> for coonsistent identification.
>
> But I had this particular doubt for treating the logo as a <h1>, after
> login for a specific group the website redirects to one deployed on a
> sub-domain, on all of the pages in the sub-domain the logo is marked as
> <h1>.
>
> From a WCAG point of view and the correct use of headings I seek your
> opinion on this matter.
>
> Also I happened to notice similar behaviour on a corporate social media
> website, am I allowed to take names here? (its not my client)
>
>
> Thanks,
> Vaibhav
>
>

From: Patrick H. Lauke
Date: Sat, Aug 15 2020 2:45PM
Subject: Re: Doubts regarding website logo
← Previous message | Next message →

On 15/08/2020 17:19, Vaibhav Saraf wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I was auditing a website where on the login page they had programmed the
> logo to be a button and a heading level 1.
>
> On all other pages the logo was programmed as a button so I had failed it
> for coonsistent identification.

Consistent identification wouldn't be quite the right SC in any case.
It's more about consistently identifying (in text/name) the same
control/functionality the same way across pages, not that there's some
consistency (of roles or whatever) between similar controls on the same
page.

> But I had this particular doubt for treating the logo as a <h1>, after
> login for a specific group the website redirects to one deployed on a
> sub-domain, on all of the pages in the sub-domain the logo is marked as
> <h1>.

It's fine as long as it's consistent. Some folks like logos as <h1>s,
others don't. What matters more is that it's predictable/implemented the
same way across all pages, so once an AT user understands that that's
the convention on that site, there's no further surprises for them.

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

From: Vaibhav Saraf
Date: Sun, Aug 16 2020 12:28PM
Subject: Re: Doubts regarding website logo
← Previous message | Next message →

Hi Patrick,

Thanks for sharing your point of view.

The logo is identified on all the pages as a link but one page where it is
a button. Yes it might not be right to classify it as a failure of
consistent identification but it is deviating from the standard use of a
button.

Thanks,
Vaibhav


On Sun, 16 Aug 2020 at 02:16, Patrick H. Lauke < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
wrote:

> On 15/08/2020 17:19, Vaibhav Saraf wrote:
> > Hi Everyone,
> >
> > I was auditing a website where on the login page they had programmed the
> > logo to be a button and a heading level 1.
> >
> > On all other pages the logo was programmed as a button so I had failed it
> > for coonsistent identification.
>
> Consistent identification wouldn't be quite the right SC in any case.
> It's more about consistently identifying (in text/name) the same
> control/functionality the same way across pages, not that there's some
> consistency (of roles or whatever) between similar controls on the same
> page.
>
> > But I had this particular doubt for treating the logo as a <h1>, after
> > login for a specific group the website redirects to one deployed on a
> > sub-domain, on all of the pages in the sub-domain the logo is marked as
> > <h1>.
>
> It's fine as long as it's consistent. Some folks like logos as <h1>s,
> others don't. What matters more is that it's predictable/implemented the
> same way across all pages, so once an AT user understands that that's
> the convention on that site, there's no further surprises for them.
>
> 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
> > > > >

From: bobby accessibility
Date: Mon, Aug 17 2020 2:40AM
Subject: Re: Doubts regarding website logo
← Previous message | Next message →

Dear Vaibhav,

Choosing a logo as heading or H1 should not be a wise decision and it will
break accessibility specially for UX..

I will suggest following acceptance criteria for logo:

1. It should be announced with a graphic logo (link or button) I will
prefer to announce this as a link
2. Exemptions for Color contrast for logo no need to worry if contrast
ratio is below 4.5:1.
3.It should be consistent all across the application.as move with top
navigation.

Hope this helps.

cheers,
Bobby


On Sun, Aug 16, 2020 at 10:29 PM Vaibhav Saraf < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
wrote:

> Hi Patrick,
>
> Thanks for sharing your point of view.
>
> The logo is identified on all the pages as a link but one page where it is
> a button. Yes it might not be right to classify it as a failure of
> consistent identification but it is deviating from the standard use of a
> button.
>
> Thanks,
> Vaibhav
>
>
> On Sun, 16 Aug 2020 at 02:16, Patrick H. Lauke < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> wrote:
>
> > On 15/08/2020 17:19, Vaibhav Saraf wrote:
> > > Hi Everyone,
> > >
> > > I was auditing a website where on the login page they had programmed
> the
> > > logo to be a button and a heading level 1.
> > >
> > > On all other pages the logo was programmed as a button so I had failed
> it
> > > for coonsistent identification.
> >
> > Consistent identification wouldn't be quite the right SC in any case.
> > It's more about consistently identifying (in text/name) the same
> > control/functionality the same way across pages, not that there's some
> > consistency (of roles or whatever) between similar controls on the same
> > page.
> >
> > > But I had this particular doubt for treating the logo as a <h1>, after
> > > login for a specific group the website redirects to one deployed on a
> > > sub-domain, on all of the pages in the sub-domain the logo is marked as
> > > <h1>.
> >
> > It's fine as long as it's consistent. Some folks like logos as <h1>s,
> > others don't. What matters more is that it's predictable/implemented the
> > same way across all pages, so once an AT user understands that that's
> > the convention on that site, there's no further surprises for them.
> >
> > 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
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > >

From: Vaibhav Saraf
Date: Mon, Aug 17 2020 10:21AM
Subject: Re: Doubts regarding website logo
← Previous message | Next message →

Thanks Bobby!

On Mon, 17 Aug 2020 at 21:15, bobby accessibility <
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:

> Dear Vaibhav,
>
> Choosing a logo as heading or H1 should not be a wise decision and it will
> break accessibility specially for UX..
>
> I will suggest following acceptance criteria for logo:
>
> 1. It should be announced with a graphic logo (link or button) I will
> prefer to announce this as a link
> 2. Exemptions for Color contrast for logo no need to worry if contrast
> ratio is below 4.5:1.
> 3.It should be consistent all across the application.as move with top
> navigation.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> cheers,
> Bobby
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 16, 2020 at 10:29 PM Vaibhav Saraf < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Patrick,
> >
> > Thanks for sharing your point of view.
> >
> > The logo is identified on all the pages as a link but one page where it
> is
> > a button. Yes it might not be right to classify it as a failure of
> > consistent identification but it is deviating from the standard use of a
> > button.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Vaibhav
> >
> >
> > On Sun, 16 Aug 2020 at 02:16, Patrick H. Lauke < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > On 15/08/2020 17:19, Vaibhav Saraf wrote:
> > > > Hi Everyone,
> > > >
> > > > I was auditing a website where on the login page they had programmed
> > the
> > > > logo to be a button and a heading level 1.
> > > >
> > > > On all other pages the logo was programmed as a button so I had
> failed
> > it
> > > > for coonsistent identification.
> > >
> > > Consistent identification wouldn't be quite the right SC in any case.
> > > It's more about consistently identifying (in text/name) the same
> > > control/functionality the same way across pages, not that there's some
> > > consistency (of roles or whatever) between similar controls on the same
> > > page.
> > >
> > > > But I had this particular doubt for treating the logo as a <h1>,
> after
> > > > login for a specific group the website redirects to one deployed on a
> > > > sub-domain, on all of the pages in the sub-domain the logo is marked
> as
> > > > <h1>.
> > >
> > > It's fine as long as it's consistent. Some folks like logos as <h1>s,
> > > others don't. What matters more is that it's predictable/implemented
> the
> > > same way across all pages, so once an AT user understands that that's
> > > the convention on that site, there's no further surprises for them.
> > >
> > > 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
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > >

From: Mark Magennis
Date: Mon, Aug 17 2020 10:58AM
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Doubts regarding website logo
← Previous message | Next message →

Hi Bobby,

I'm not sure I understand why having a logo as the H1 breaks accessibility. It seems like the obvious choice to me.

For example, suppose you have a website of a company called The Company. The home page has a 'The Company' logo at the top. What should be the main heading of this page?

It's the home page but you're not going to put a heading 'Home' on it. It probably doesn't have any visible title that could sensibly be used as the page heading. The sensible choice for the home page title and therefore the H1 is usually 'The Company'.

You already have a logo which contains the words "The Company" and the text alternative of that is "The Company", so rather than add another heading, doesn't make sense to use that?

But you don't want to do this on any page other than the home page because other pages need a unique title specific to their content. This means you end up with some inconsistency - on other pages the logo is only a link. But I don't think that's a problem at all.

Mark

From: bobby accessibility
Date: Thu, Aug 20 2020 7:59AM
Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL]Doubts regarding website logo
← Previous message | No next message

Hi Mark,

Thanks for your detailed observation, appreciate it.

Since we are not consistent with the logo as it will move with top
navigation (work as global nav) commonly used with all the pages. And I am
sure the page structure would not be the same as we have in the Home page
without the main heading and logo has been taken as H1, I believe other
pages should have their own H1 (main heading).

Because of this reason it would fail the consistency level. I would prefer
content authors should provide the relevant main heading for the home page
so that we will separate logo announcements as heading and let it drive
consistently for all across pages.

Also this won't help users to use "Skip to main content" to bypass the
global nav where we have the logo, generally Logo comes at the beginning of
the page, and in this case it would be little complex to set the focus on
main body without main heading (as main body of the page should start from
H1 for best user experience). I know you can add a *main landmark *at the
beginning of the main div of the main body but it would not be that smooth
and logically perfect for users.

I will suggest we need to provide a smooth journey for users without
raising any confusion.

Regards,
Bobby.



On Mon, Aug 17, 2020 at 8:59 PM Mark Magennis < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
wrote:

> Hi Bobby,
>
> I'm not sure I understand why having a logo as the H1 breaks
> accessibility. It seems like the obvious choice to me.
>
> For example, suppose you have a website of a company called The Company.
> The home page has a 'The Company' logo at the top. What should be the main
> heading of this page?
>
> It's the home page but you're not going to put a heading 'Home' on it. It
> probably doesn't have any visible title that could sensibly be used as the
> page heading. The sensible choice for the home page title and therefore the
> H1 is usually 'The Company'.
>
> You already have a logo which contains the words "The Company" and the
> text alternative of that is "The Company", so rather than add another
> heading, doesn't make sense to use that?
>
> But you don't want to do this on any page other than the home page because
> other pages need a unique title specific to their content. This means you
> end up with some inconsistency - on other pages the logo is only a link.
> But I don't think that's a problem at all.
>
> Mark
>
>