Tag: Accessibility

a11y is web accessibility

Eric Bailey eviscerates the notion that the term “a11y” isn’t accessible. It’s a hot take that I’ve had myself, embarrassingly enough.

I never see people asking why WWI is written out the way it is, either. Won’t people confuse that with the first Wonder Woman movie? Or the first season of Westworld? Or some new Weight Watchers product? I also never see people questioning technical numeronyms like P2P, S3, or W3C?

If you are seeing the term for the first time and are confused, it’s extremely easy to search for and figure out. There are heaping piles of examples of people using it for very legitimate sites, products, conferences, and more. It’s no more of a spell-checking foul as any other industry jargon and easy enough to ignore.

Plus, you can always introduce it with semantic HTML:

Like any other abbreviation, I observe the Web Content Accessibility Guideline’s (WCAG) Success Criterion 3.1.4. Like any other acronym or industry jargon, I spell out the term in full the first time it appears in my writing, then follow it up with the acronym it represents:

Accessibility (<abbr>a11y</abbr>)

It reminds me of the term serverless. The obligatory hot take on it is that servers are still in use, but the quicker you get over it, the quicker you can get to realizing it’s a powerful industry-changing idea.

Direct Link to ArticlePermalink


The post a11y is web accessibility appeared first on CSS-Tricks.

You can support CSS-Tricks by being an MVP Supporter.

CSS-Tricks

,

a11y is web accessibility

Eric Bailey eviscerates the notion that the term “a11y” isn’t accessible. It’s a hot take that I’ve had myself, embarrassingly enough.

I never see people asking why WWI is written out the way it is, either. Won’t people confuse that with the first Wonder Woman movie? Or the first season of Westworld? Or some new Weight Watchers product? I also never see people questioning technical numeronyms like P2P, S3, or W3C?

If you are seeing the term for the first time and are confused, it’s extremely easy to search for and figure out. There are heaping piles of examples of people using it for very legitimate sites, products, conferences, and more. It’s no more of a spell-checking foul as any other industry jargon and easy enough to ignore.

Plus, you can always introduce it with semantic HTML:

Like any other abbreviation, I observe the Web Content Accessibility Guideline’s (WCAG) Success Criterion 3.1.4. Like any other acronym or industry jargon, I spell out the term in full the first time it appears in my writing, then follow it up with the acronym it represents:

Accessibility (<abbr>a11y</abbr>)

It reminds me of the term serverless. The obligatory hot take on it is that servers are still in use, but the quicker you get over it, the quicker you can get to realizing it’s a powerful industry-changing idea.


The post a11y is web accessibility appeared first on CSS-Tricks.

You can support CSS-Tricks by being an MVP Supporter.

CSS-Tricks

,
[Top]

Five 5-minute Videos from Ethan on Design & Accessibility

Ethan:

I’ve been working with Aquent Gymnasium to produce a series of five short tutorial videos, which have been launching over the course of this past week. Since the last video just went live, I’m thrilled to share the whole list with you:

Introduction to using VoiceOver on macOS
Designing beautiful focus states
Flexible and accessible typesetting
Responsively designing with viewport units
Designing beautiful and accessible drop caps

Five minutes is a real sweet spot for a how-to video. Ain’t no time to screw around. I loved every minute of these.

Direct Link to ArticlePermalink

The post Five 5-minute Videos from Ethan on Design & Accessibility appeared first on CSS-Tricks.

CSS-Tricks

, , , , , ,
[Top]

Accessibility Links

Austin Gil has kicked off the first in a five-part series about “HTML Forms Right” and to starts with semantics. It’s talking to the “we build our front-ends with JavaScript” crowd. The first block of code is an example of an Ajax form submission where the data submitted is gathered through the JavaScript API FormData.

Why is that so vital? Well, no <form> tag, no FormData. Why else use a form (aside from the Enter-key submission):

“But Austin, I’m building an SPA. Therefore if the user even sees the form, it means JavaScript MUST be enabled.” And you’d be right. Although, if it is an important form, you may want to consider supporting a no-JS world. The day may come that you want to implement SSR.

Server-Side Rendering (SSR) is going to get easier and easier to do as the benefits of it become more and more obvious. Google tells us a page that is client-side rendered has week-long-ish queue to get indexed and re-indexed on changes. Not to mention SSR is almost definitely going to be far faster to load.


Oscar Braunert’s Inclusive Inputs is a nice follow-up read as it begins with form HTML that is so close to being right, but is painfully not right. (Hint: it’s missing the label/input connection). Then he gets into interesting patterns like how to accessibly mark up required fields and fields with errors. Like:

<div class="form-group">   <label for="password">     Password     <span class="required" aria-hidden="true">*</span>     <span class="sr-only">required</span>   </label>   <input      type="password"     id="password"     name="password"     aria-describedby="desc_pw"   >   <p class="aside" id="desc_pw">Your password needs to have at least eight characters.</p> </div>

Amber Wilson gets into Accessible HTML elements with the twist of avoiding any ARIA usage at all:

You may be aware that ARIA roles are often used with HTML elements. I haven’t written about them here, as it’s good to see how HTML written without ARIA can still be accessible.

Shout out to <dl>.


Sarah Higley does get into ARIA in Roles and relationships, but she warns us to be very careful upfront:

[…] a budding accessibility practitioner might find themselves experimenting with more serious roles like menulistbox, or even treegrid. These are tantalizing, powerful patterns that allow you to create experiences that are not supported by only vanilla HTML. Unfortunately, they are also brittle; even small mistakes in using these roles can take a user on a very bad trip.

Talk to your kids about ARIA before it’s too late.

Ideally, don’t use ARIA at all. But if the accessibility is screwed up to the point it can’t be fixed at the DOM level, Sarah gets into some tricks. For example, one uses role="presentation" to essentially remove an element’s default role (when it is in the way).


Speaking of ARIA and not using it unless you have to, one of the things you can do with ARIA is label controls. Adrian Roselli has thoughts on how best to do that:

Here is the priority I follow when assigning an accessible name to a control:

1. Native HTML techniques
2. aria-labelledby pointing at existing visible text
3. Visibly-hidden content that is still in the page
4. aria-label

The post Accessibility Links appeared first on CSS-Tricks.

CSS-Tricks

,
[Top]

15 Things to Improve Your Website Accessibility

This is a really great list from Bruce. There is a lot of directly actionable stuff here. Send it around to your team and make it something that you all go through together.

Here’s a little one that prodded me to finally fix…

Most screen readers allow the user to quickly see a list of links on a page [..] However, if every link has text saying “Click here” or “Read more”, with nothing else to distinguish them, this is useless. The easiest way to solve this is simply to write unique link text, but if that isn’t possible, you can over-ride the link text for assistive technology by using a unique aria-label attribute on each link.

I had links like that right here on CSS-Tricks. Some of them are automatically created by WordPress itself, not something I hand-coded into a template. When you show the_excerpt of a post, you get a “read more” link automatically, and aside from getting your hands dirty with some filters, you don’t have that much control over it.

DevTools showing the DOM of a "read more" link with no context.

Fortunately, I already use a cool plugin called Advanced Excerpt. I poked into the settings to see if I could do something about injecting the post title in there somehow. Lookie lookie:

A setting for Advanced Excerpt that does screen reader links.

That screen-reader-text class is exactly what I already used for that kind of stuff, so it was a one-click fix!

Much nicer DOM now for those links:

Direct Link to ArticlePermalink

The post 15 Things to Improve Your Website Accessibility appeared first on CSS-Tricks.

CSS-Tricks

, , ,
[Top]

Understanding Web Accessibility Color Contrast Guidelines and Ratios

What should you do when you get a complaint about the color contrast in your web design? It might seem perfectly fine to you because you’re able to read content throughout the site, but to someone else, it might be a totally different experience. How can put yourself in that person’s shoes to improve their experience?

There are some relatively easy ways to test contrast. For example, you can check the site on your phone or tablet in bright sunlight, or add a CSS filter to mimic a grayscale view). But… you don’t have to trust your eyes. Not everyone has your exact eyes anyway, so your subjective opinion can possibly be a faulty measurement. 

You can mathematically know if two colors have enough contrast between them. 

The W3C has a document called Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1 that covers  successful contrast guidelines. Before we get to the math, we need to know what contrast ratio scores we are aiming to meet or exceed. To get a passing grade (AA), the contrast ratio is 4.5:1 for most body text and 3:1 for larger text. 

How did the W3C arrive at these ratios?

The guidelines were created for anyone using a standard browser, with no additional assistive technology. The contrast ratios that the WCAG suggests were based initially on earlier contrast standards and adjusted to accommodate newer display technologies, like antialiased text, so content would be readable by people with a variety of visual or cognitive difficulties, whether it be due to age, sickness, or other losses of visual acuity.  

We’re basically aiming to make text readable for someone with 20/40 vision, which is equivilent to the vision of someone 80 years old. Visual acuity of 20/40 means you can only read something at 20 feet away that someone with perfect 20/20 vision could read if it was 40 feet away.

So, say your design calls for antialiased text because it looks much smoother on a screen. It actually sacrifices a bit of contrast and ding your ratio. The WCAG goes into more detail on how scoring works.

There are other standards that take contrast in consideration, and the WCAG used some of these considerations to develop their scoring. One is called the Human Factors Engineering of Computer Workstations (ANSI/HFES 100-2007) was published in 2007 and designated as an American standard for ergonomics. It combined and replaced two earlier standards that were created by separate committees. The goal of the combined standard was to accommodate 90% of computer users, and cover many aspects of computer use and ergonomics, including visual displays and contrast. So, that means we have physical screens to consider in our designs.

What does the ratio mean?

The contrast ratio explains the difference between the lightest color brightness and the darkest color brightness in a given range. It’s the relative luminance of each color.

Let’s start with an egregious example of a teal color text on a light gray background. 

<h1>Title of Your Awesome Site</h1>
h1 {   background-color: #1ABC9C;   color: #888888; }
Yikes!

It’s worth calling out that some tools, like WordPress, provide a helpful warning for this when there’s a poorly contrasted text and background combination. In the case of WordPress, a you get notice in the sidebar.

“This color combination may be hard for people to read. Try using a brighter background color and/or a darker text color.”

“OK,” you say. “Perhaps you think that teal on gray color combination is not exactly great, but I can still make out what the content says.“ (I’m glad one of us can because it’s pretty much a muddy gray mess to me.)

The contrast ratio for that fine piece of hypertext is 1.47:1.

I wanted a better understanding of what the contrast scores were actually checking and came to find that it requires the use of mathematics… with a side of understanding the differences between human and computer vision.  This journey taught me about the history of computer vision and a bit about biology, and gave me a small review of some math concepts I haven’t touched since college.

Here’s the equation:

(L1 + 0.05) / (L2 + 0.05)
  • L1 is the relative luminance of the lighter of the colors.
  • L2 is the relative luminance of the darker of the colors.

This seems simple, right? But first we need to determine the relative luminance for each color to get those variables.

OK, back to relative luminance

We mentioned it in passing, but it’s worth going deeper into relative luminance, or the relative brightness of any color expressed into a spectrum between 0 (black) and 1 (white).

To determine the relative luminance for each color, we first need to get the RGB notation for a color. Sometimes we’re working with HEX color values and need to covert that over to RGB. There are online calculators that will do this for us, but there’s solid math happening in the background that makes it happen. Our teal hex color, #1ABC9C, becomes an RGB of 26, 188, 156.

Next, we take each value of the RGB color and divide each one by 255 (the max integer of RGB values) to get a linear value between 0 and 1. 

So now with our teal color it looks like this:

Component Equation Value
Red 26/255 0.10196078
Green 188/255 0.73725490
Blue 156/255 0.61176471

Then we apply gamma correction, which defines the relationship between a pixel’s numerical value and its actual luminance, to each component part of the RGB color. If the linear value of a component is less than .03938, we divide it by 12.92. Otherwise, we add .055 and divide the total by 1.055 and take the result to the power of 2.4.

Our gamma corrected color components from our teal color end up like this:

Component Equation Value
Red ((0.10196078 +.055)/1.055) ^ 2.4 0.01032982
Green ((0.73725490 +.055)/1.055) ^ 2.4 0.50288646
Blue ((0.61176471 +.055)/1.055) ^ 2.4 0.33245154

This part of our equation comes from the formula for determining relative luminance.

We just sort of sped past gamma correction there without talking much about it and what it does. In short, it translates what a computer “sees” into the human perception of brightness. Computers record light directly where twice the photons equals twice the brightness. Human eyes perceive more levels of light in dim conditions and fewer in bright conditions. The digital devices around us make gamma encoding and decoding calculations all the time. It’s used to show us things on the screens that match up to our perception of how things appear to our eyes.

Finally, we multiply the different colors by numbers that signify how bright that color appears to the human eye. That means we determine the luminance of each color by multiplying the red component value by .2126, the green component value by .7152, and the blue component by .0722 before adding all three of those results together. You’ll note that green gets the highest value here,

So, one last time for teal:

Component Equation Value
Red 0.01032982  X 0.2126 0.00219611973
Green 0.50288646  X 0.7152 0.35966439619
Blue 0.33245154  X 0.0722 0.02400300118

…and add them together for luminance!

L1 = 0.00219611973 + 0.35966439619 + 0.02400300118 = 0.38586352

If we do the same to get our L2 value, that gives us 0.24620133.

We finally have the L1 and L2 values we need to calculate contrast. To determine which value is  L1 and and which is L2 , we need to make sure that the larger number (which shows the lighter color) is always L1 and is divided by the smaller/darker color as L2.

Now compare that result with the WCAG success criterias. For standard text size, between 18-22 points, a minimul result of 4.5 will pass with a grade of AA. If our text is larger, then a slightly lower score of  3 will do the job. But to get the highest WCAG grade (AAA), we have to have a contrast ratio result of at least 7. Our lovely combination fails all tests, coming far under 4.5 for regular text or 3 for headline style text. Time to choose some better colors!

I’m so glad we have computers and online tools to do this work for us! Trying to work out the details step-by-step on paper gave me a couple weeks of frustration. It was a lot of me getting things wrong when comparing results to those of automated contrast checkers.

Remember how teachers in school always wanted you to show your math work to prove how you got to the answer? I made something to help us out.

If you view this demo with the console open, you’ll see the math that goes into each step of the calculations. Go ahead, try our two example colors, like #1ABC9C and #888888.

I just want my page to have proper contrast, what do I do?!

There are a variety of accessibility resources that you can can audit your site. Here’s a list I put together, and there’s another list here on CSS-Tricks.

But here are a few tips to get you started.

First, identify areas that are not serving your accessibility needs.

The WAVE accessibility tool is a good place to start. Run your site through that and it will give you contrast results and help identify trouble areas.

Yay, passing scores!

Follow the suggestions of the audit

Use best practices to improve your scores, and remove the errors. Once you identify contrast errors, you can try out some different options right there in the WAVE tool. Click on the color box to pop open a color picker. Then play around until the errors go away, and you’ll know what you can replace in your code.

Run the test again

This way, you can make sure your changes improved things. Congratulations! You just made your product better for all users, not just ones affected by the accessibility errors!

What comes next is up to you!

You can make it easier on yourself and start all new products with the goal of making them accessible. Make accessibility guidelines part of your requirements for both technology and design. You’ll save yourself potentially hundreds of hours of remediation, and potential legal complaints. U.S. government and education websites are required to comply, but other industries are often taken to task for not making their sites equally available for all people.

If you have the option, consider using established and tested frameworks and web libraries (like Bootstrap or Google’s Material Design) that have already figured out optimum contrast theme colors. In many cases, you can take just what you need (like only the CSS) or at least review their color palettes to inform choices. You should still check the contrast though because, while most standard text options in a framework may follow contrast ratio WCAG suggestions, things like alert and message styles may not. (I’m looking at you, Bootstrap!)

Derek Kay has reviewed a list of web frameworks with a focus on accessibility, which I suggest you read if you are looking for more options. The U.S. Web Design System shows one way to solve color/contrast puzzles using their CSS token system that labels colors to make contrast differences super clear), but they also link to several very good resources for improving and understanding contrast.

We took a deeper dive here than perhaps you ever really need to know, but understanding what a contrast ratio is and what it actually means should help you remember to keep contrast in mind when designing future sites, web apps, and other software.

Having a clearer understanding of what the contrast ratio means helps me to remember who poor contrast can affect, and how to improve web and mobile products overall.

I’m not the ultimate subject expert on contrast, just a very, very curious girl who sometimes has issues reading things on the web with low contrast.

If you have any additional thoughts, corrections or further research to share, please leave a comment and I’ll amend this article! The fuller our understanding of the needs and requirements of our sites is, the better we can plan improvements and ultimately serve the needs of our audiences.

The post Understanding Web Accessibility Color Contrast Guidelines and Ratios appeared first on CSS-Tricks.

CSS-Tricks

, , , , ,
[Top]

Bad accessibility equals bad quality

Here’s a smart post from Manuel Matuzovic where he digs into why accessibility is so important for building websites:

Web accessibility is not just about keyboard users, color contrast or screen readers. Accessibility is a perfect indicator for the quality of a website. Accessibility is strongly interlocked with other areas of web design and web development. If your website is accessible, it usually means that it’s inclusive, resilient, usable, it offers great UX for everyone, and it’s fast.

I love this idea: that you can’t have a good UI that isn’t also accessible and how accessibility, performance, and quality are all intermingled with one another. Actually, this has me thinking… I’ve never worked on a project where either of these things are the problem in isolation. It’s all of them, always.

Direct Link to ArticlePermalink

The post Bad accessibility equals bad quality appeared first on CSS-Tricks.

CSS-Tricks

, ,
[Top]

Debunking the Myth: Accessibility and React

I find it notable when the blog of a major accessibility-focused company like Deque publishes an article called Debunking the Myth: Accessibility and React. Mark Steadman is essentially saying if a site has bad accessibility, it ain’t React… it’s you. The tools are there to achieve good accessibility.

React didn’t use a <div> for a <button>, but you did. React didn’t force extra markup all over the page when you decided to not use a Fragment. React didn’t forget to change the title of the page, because that was something you neglected.

Is it different how you have to do it in React versus how you have to do it in some other framework or CMS? Yes, it is. Different, but neither worse nor harder.

I’m optimistic that well-made React components focused on accessibility can have a positive impact on the web. Just today I was pair programming and looking at some HTML for a toggle UI in a Rails template. It had a little bug we wanted to fix, which required an HTML change. But this toggle wasn’t a component, it was a chunk of HTML used in dozens of places on the site. Gosh, did I wish this part of the site was architected with proper components instead, a practice that all JavaScript frameworks endorse?

Where did the bad wrap on React come from? Well, we could debate that for days. Is it that JavaScript-focused developers never got the HTML training they needed? Maybe. Was it gnarly, unsemantic React code that was written early on that others copy and pasted too many times? Maybe. I’m not sure we’ll ever know. The important thing is that we all do a better job now.

Direct Link to ArticlePermalink

The post Debunking the Myth: Accessibility and React appeared first on CSS-Tricks.

CSS-Tricks

, , ,
[Top]

Growing Accessibility Conversations

I started this year on a new path at Knowbility — to help people and organizations create accessible content and apps. But what was exciting and helped motivate me more were two things:

  1. WebAIM’s Accessibility Analysis of One Million Page Homepages. With over 97% of sites having WCAG failure of some kind, it’s a stinging indictment on our industry. There’s a lot of work to be done — that means outreach and education, helping other developers incorporate accessibility into their workflows, coding pull requests with accessibility fixes, making certain components for design systems are accessible and much more.
  2. The Supreme Court of the United States rejecting Domino’s appeal. The Supreme Court leaves the Ninth Circuit federal appeals court’s ruling, which means that people with disabilities who have trouble with sites or apps that are not accessible can bring claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). This result means that organizations can’t kick the proverbial can down the road for making their apps and products accessible.

In regards to the One Million Pages, I noticed that web designers and developers outside of accessibility circles discussing accessibility with a sustained focus I hadn’t witnessed before.

And I would have conversations with people outside web design and development altogether about accessibility due to this court case alone. Companies and organizations were watching it very closely.

This added increased awareness from both WebAIM’s report and the Domino’s appeal has helped fuel the discussion, making it easier to keep the conversation going to make digital accessible to all.

The post Growing Accessibility Conversations appeared first on CSS-Tricks.

CSS-Tricks

, ,
[Top]

Automated (and Guided!) Accessibility Audits with axe Pro

It’s important to know there are tools for automated accessibility testing of websites. They are a vital part in helping make sure your website is usable for everyone, which is both a noble goal and damn good for business. Automated tests won’t catch every potential accessibility issue, but they help a great deal, and in my experience, help establish a culture of caring about accessibility. The more seriously you take these tests and actually fix the problems, the more likely it is you’re doing a good job of accessibility overall.

There is one testing tool that stands above the rest, axe (it’s even what Google’s Lighthouse uses), and now it’s gotten a whole lot better with axe Pro.

The axe extention is still the powerhouse, where robust accessibility reports are a click away in DevTools:

axe in Chrome DevTools

But there’s more!

Guided Question-Answer Accessibility Walkthroughs

Not to bury the lede, this is probably the best new feature of axe Pro. The tool is so friendly, it gives accessibility testing powers to just about anybody:

“Axe Pro essentially lets every developer function as an in-house accessibility expert,” says Preety Kumar, CEO of Deque Systems.

Run the tests, and it just asks you stuff in plain English.

Screenshot of axe asking me if the page title is correct on this page
Anybody can answer questions from a guided tour like this. It’s extremely helpful to be hand-held through thinking about these important aspects of your site.

For example, here’s a test walkthrough of it helping me think about header and header levels:

Step 1: start test
Step 2: Identify headers that shouldn't be.
Step 3: Identify elements that should be headers but aren't.

First, you identify the problems, then you can save the information so you can work on the fixes as you can.

Your tests can be saved as online reports

Working in DevTools is nice and the perfect place to be digging into the accessibility issues on your site. But that session in DevTools is short-lived! It’s just one developer working on one computer at one point in time. With the new axe Pro web dashboard, you can save your tests online. This is useful for a variety of reasons:

  • You can save your testing so far and come back to it later to keep going.
  • You can clear out tests and re-do them, to track your progress moving forward.
  • You can have multiple tests on the dashboard to help you test multiple pages and projects.
  • Your team has a home to manage these tests all together.

You can export the data

If you’d prefer to get the results out of axe and somewhere else, you can now export the data as JSON or CSV. Perhaps you want to track the results over time to visualize improvements or port the information to some other tool. The data is yours.

export dialog box for axe test results

I found helpful prompts immediately.

I’d like to think I care about accessibility and work accessibily as I go, but if you’re anything like me, you’ll find mistakes find their way into your code bases over time. Just like we might have automated tools to watch our performance metrics over time, we can and should be regularly testing accessibility, especially when automation helpfulness like axe Pro provides.

Just in playing with axe Pro for a few hours, I’ve…

  • Found many images that had missing and incorrect alt text on them.
  • Found a few elements that were using header tags that really shouldn’t have been.
  • Fixed some color contrast on some elements that were just barely not AA and light tweaks got them there.

That second one I found very satisfying as the guided tour helped me find them. That’s something an entirely automated tool won’t really help find, it requires you looking at things and making judgment calls.

I’m very optimistic this is going to help lots of folks unearth accessibility issues they wouldn’t have caught otherwise.

It’s free for a limited time

It’s kind of a big deal:

Developers can typically identify about half of all critical accessibility blockers through axe.

You might as well try it out!

The post Automated (and Guided!) Accessibility Audits with axe Pro appeared first on CSS-Tricks.

CSS-Tricks

, , ,
[Top]