Replies: 12 comments 34 replies
-
+zillion Especially with WCAG 2 becoming mandatory in more places, giving accessibility information a more prominent place is really important. (accessible web-sites are not just good for people that need it: it improves them for everybody; I know that @hkolbeck knows this, but many others still need to be educated on this) |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I've done an initial first go. I'd intended to just do a local PR, but c'est la vie, it's done, no reason to undo it. mdn/content#28201 Edit: Closed, see https://github.com/orgs/mdn/discussions/430#discussioncomment-6562096 for discussion |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
@hkolbeck I totally agree with you that the Accessibility concerns should be as prominent as possible. I do think that before doing any more work on changing the position of them all, we should get a consensus on if and where to move them, to avoid wasting your precious time. In my experience, MDN readers tend to look at the top and bottom of pages, and the examples. They want a description of what x does, they want to look at the compat data to see if they can use it in their project, and they want to grab an example to copy and paste into their code editor. Anything in the middle of the page is most likely to get overlooked. Also, note that a lot of CSS pages have Accessibility concerns sections too; they would also need changing. This all said I think higher up is probably better for these in terms of visibility. They should definitely be above the technical summary stuff, as that is seldom looked at. I think that above the "Examples" section would be the best place — it is important fundamental information to know when using the feature, but I feel that the attributes the element can have applied to it is more fundamental and should be higher up. It also makes sense from a learning flow perspective. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I agree with @chrisdavidmills that this should be above "Examples". I don't know why we have both "Usage notes" and "Accessibility concerns" when the latter is a subset of the former, but I'm okay to put the latter before the former if that's more visible. However it should definitely be below "Attributes" and "Events", because these are indispensable parts to understanding how the element works at all, while "Accessibility concerns" just provides more context about proper usage. "Accessibility concerns" may also make references to certain attributes (like "do not use autofocus"), and it would be jarring if |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I think this is a good example: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/input/number#accessibility
In the GOV.UK Design System, we have a prominent section at the top about usage that covers advantages and disadvantages, and in extreme cases recommends against usage. That may or may not be something you can do here, but I'm linking it as an example: |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I would advocate the following:
The intent is to alert both linear readers and ctrl-f developers to any critical issues. I realize that's a lot of work and won't happen overnight, but I'm willing to do the initial work of just moving and renaming sections. Edit: I'm volunteering to do the initial move for the HTML element pages, is anyone willing to take on the CSS pages? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Update: I'm afraid my life went a bit sideways last month, and I'm just starting to recover. I hope to return to this soon, but if anyone is willing to take on the template reshuffle, it would be so appreciated |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Hello, thanks @hkolbeck for pushing forward this discussion and for signal boosting recently. I'd like to pick this up, starting with a PR to improve the HTML element page template as suggested. (Note I don't have the technical knowledge to review all the content in these accessibility sections, I'll focus just on moving said content) |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Hi everyone, I'd like to chime in on this discussion. Thanks @hkolbeck for raising it; this is indeed an important topic, and I completely agree with moving the accessibility section before "Examples" on HTML element pages (and probably after "Description" on CSS property pages). I have some remarks about renaming the section though. To me, the section name "Accessibility" on its own seems a bit incomplete; it seems to need an adjective to clarify what aspect of accessibility, related to the current element or property, this section is addressing. To strike a balance between calling it "Accessibility concerns" (since not all such sections present the content as concerns or issues) or "Accessibility guidelines", I would suggest calling it "Accessibility notes" to cover concerns, warnings, guidelines, best practices, and so on. Alternatively, I also quite like "Accessibility guidelines" as an over overarching option. When we update the HTML element page and CSS property page templates, apart from the name and position changes, we'll also need to update the description of the section to align with the new name ("Accessibility" or "Accessibility notes" or something else). At the moment, the section refers to "potential accessibility concerns", but we need to widen its scope to include guidelines and best practices as well (essentially, not focusing on just "concerns"). |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
This coming Friday, July 26th, is the 1 year birthday of this thread. Let's put this to bed without cake. I made this Mastodon post but I won't be able to do much more due to brain cancer. Any help, especially project management, is appreciated. 💜 Hannah |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
For reference:
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
I've compiled what I hope is a practical list of existing notices followed by a list of elements, sections, and attributes that could benefit from the proposed notices or just revisions in of themselves (incomplete). I've written it in Notion but can transfer it to a Gist/repository, Google Docs, or other. I can invite people to collaborate on the document. https://mcaskill.notion.site/mdn-content-430-227c4907aeb14bc59b9ff5c97e30db8b For an element like Note If you use this element, you need to be conscious of:
Or as a sentence instead of a list: Note If you use this element, you need to be conscious of inconsistent support across browsers and screen reader combinations, along with limited CSS support and fixed font size of options list. For an element like Note If you use this element, you need to be conscious of providing textual replacements for key images for assistive technology, when browser is non-visual or images are disabled, when image format is unsupported, or when image fails to load. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Per the element page template, accessibility concerns are towards the bottom of the page, just above the technical summary: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/MDN/Writing_guidelines/Page_structures/Page_types/HTML_element_page_template#accessibility_concerns
It seems likely that most readers would never make it that far down the page, and so miss the fact that they could be making the web less accessible.
I would propose moving it to just above attributesSee below for revised proposal. This was spurred by this example: mdn/content#28189There's definitely a few, but it doesn't seem like an unconquerable number:
Edit: After some discussion below, I would advocate the following steps:
The intent is to alert both linear readers and ctrl-f developers to any critical issues, with easy to find and consistently placed documentation on more general accessibility questions.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions