Skip to main content

Home/ Web Accessibility/ Group items tagged validator

Rss Feed Group items tagged

Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics Simple Middle
Vernon Fowler

Don't Rely on Default Browser Error Messages - Intopia - 0 views

intopia.digital/...default-browser-error-messages

accessibility forms validation HTML5

shared by Vernon Fowler on 06 Feb 19 - No Cached
  • Another issue is that the messages are temporary. As soon as you put focus on the input with mouse, keyboard or touch, the message disappears. People with cognitive impairments will find it difficult to use these, and I think anyone trying to fill in the form while they’re distracted will have trouble as well. People who rely on the keyboard for navigation (which includes both sighted users and screen reader users) will also lose these messages as they move around the form.
  • If you’re confident of your error messages, you can remove the browser validation by adding the novalidate attribute to the wrapping form element, like this: <form novalidate>...</form>
  • You can style this with CSS, using the :valid and :invalid pseudo-classes
  • ...2 more annotations...
  • Only the first error is noted with a message.
  • The rest rely on a change of border colour, which is, again, not evident to screen reader users.
  • Vernon Fowler on 06 Feb 19
     
    "When I found out the major browsers were beginning to include error validation into their support for forms, I was pretty excited. Form validation is always a fiddly part of accessibility, so I'm always looking out for ways to make it easier for developers to do properly. I read MDN's form data validation tutorial and a CSS Tricks article on client-side form validation and immediately made some test forms. Sadly, I was disappointed with the results. The default error validation in browsers is almost completely inaccessible. I was hoping we'd get default "you've forgotten to fill this in" messages that could be customised. I might have been a bit too optimistic! Validation at the browser level has many of the same issues we find at the website level."
Vernon Fowler

Validation messages - 0 views

www.accessibility-developer-guide.com/...validation-messages

forms accessibility validation

shared by Vernon Fowler on 09 Feb 19 - No Cached
  • If there are any validation messages, the focus is set to the first invalid input: this way, a screen reader will immediately announce the associated message, so the user knows that there is at least one invalid input to be fixed.
  • For multiple radio buttons or checkboxes, the message is associated to the surrounding <fieldset>.
  • In addition to this, each invalid input is associated to its message using aria-describedby. This is important, as it makes sure that screen readers also announce the messages when navigating through the inputs using the Tab key.
  • Vernon Fowler on 09 Feb 19
     
    "Data submitted in a form is usually validated in some way. And if there is any unacceptable data, the form is traditionally re-displayed, together with validation messages. In such a case, it is important to immediately inform screen reader users, so they know that they have to look at their data and submit again. "
Sandra Earl

Validation alone is not enough | 456 Berea Street - 0 views

www.456bereastreet.com/...validation_alone_is_not_enough

accessibility validation testing

shared by Sandra Earl on 12 Oct 10 - Cached
  • Some people call me a validation fanatic, and maybe they are right. I do want every HTML document I create and all the sites I build to be valid and remain valid. Validation is an integral part of quality assurance to me
Vernon Fowler

Juicy Studio: CSS Analyser - 0 views

juicystudio.com/...csstest.php

test testing accessibility css webdesign tools validation webdev usability validator

shared by Vernon Fowler on 02 Aug 11 - Cached
  • Vernon Fowler on 02 Aug 11
     
    "This service has been provided to allow you to check the validity of your CSS against the W3C's validation service, along with a colour contrast test, and a test to ensure that relevant sizes are specified in relative units of measurement. If the CSS is specified by a URL, it will be loaded into the text area to offer an option to make changes for testing without having to re-upload. "
Vernon Fowler

How Can I Validate (X)HTML + ARIA? | The Paciello Group BlogThe Paciello Group Blog - 0 views

blog.paciellogroup.com/...how-can-i-validate-xhtml-aria

validation validator webdesign webdev testing tool

shared by Vernon Fowler on 27 Feb 14 - No Cached
  • The DTD I have used is the HTML 4.01 loose DTD with ARIA attributes added
  • A way I have developed to do this is by creating a bookmarklet that takes the innerHTML of a document (without the DOCTYPE) and adds the custom DOCTYPE to it and then sends it to the W3C validator: HTML4.01-loose+ARIA Checker (add as a favorite to try it out)
Vernon Fowler

The Accessibility of WAI-ARIA · An A List Apart Article - 0 views

alistapart.com/...the-accessibility-of-wai-aria

accessibility forms html aria

shared by Vernon Fowler on 10 Feb 14 - No Cached
  • Pages semantically enriched through WAI-ARIA do not currently validate, but this drawback is acceptable: Common browsers do not mind the additional markup.
  • Some sites currently circumvent the validation problem by adding WAI-ARIA attributes to the source code via a script that is executed when the page loads.
  • in HTML5, WAI-ARIA validates
  • ...1 more annotation...
  • as long as older screen reader/browser combinations incapable of interpreting WAI-ARIA still constitute a significant part of the installed base, web designers who care for accessibility should use WAI-ARIA markup only to enrich their sites. They should not rely on it.
Sandra Earl

Designing and Developing mobile web sites in the real world, part 2 - Opera Developer C... - 0 views

dev.opera.com/...d-developing-mobile-web-site-1

accessibility mobile opera best practices reading

shared by Sandra Earl on 12 Oct 10 - Cached
  • In tandem with the launch of their 3G mobile website, Siminn also launched a slightly lighter version of the same site - a 2G-optimized mobile presence to serve less powerful phones. Both sites are anchored to the same reservoir of information, but the 3G site makes less-restricted use of CSS, images, and other coding ornamentations.
  • The only distinction Siminn makes concerning the dimensionality of the user-experience is whether the device is 2G or 3G enabled. As stated before, 2G devices are sent to a slightly lighter version of the 3G site
  • This is exactly what Siminn are doing. By detecting the type of phone, they are presenting the customer with the most appropriate version of the page – either the 3G enhanced or the more basic design.
  • ...19 more annotations...
  • e chose not to try and replicate the entire Icelandair website, but rather to cleave from it four or five of its most crucial elements.
  • This page contains the only form on the mobile site. In general, forms should be avoided because form input via a mobile device can be a tricky endeavor. However, there are certain coding practices that can simplify form input. For example, if your form field should only accept numeric input, then you should make use of the -wap-input-format property of WAP CSS. The Apple iPhone will automatically set the input to numeric if the name of the input element is set to certain values - phone or zip for example.
  • Mobile users only need to be shown news items that have some inherent urgency.
  • Much like your desktop browser recognizes a mailto: link as an email address, mobile devices recognize tel: links and phone numbers.
  • Do not assume that just because the UA string is not in your enumerated list of “Accepted strings”, it is not possible to view the site.
  • This is where you build in progressive enhancements to the website experience.
  • WURFL is an open source list of known phones and their capabilities. This can be put into a database and when a mobile device visits the your site you can sniff the UA, look-up the capabilities of that device (including screen-dimensions, default browser, etc) and serve them the best possible experience.
  • The RDF vocabulary is a standard across many mobile devices. Vendors that use this approach allow mobile sites to keep up-to-date with any new devices, without having to keep their own database of device types.
  • ou can find more details about standards support in Opera Mini/Mobile 4 here: Designing with Opera Mini 4 in mind JavaScript support in Opera Mini 4
  • There are a few basic coding items to avoid in the mobile web space. Chief among these, at least for now (now being 10/2007), is client-side scripting.
  • While it's tempting to try and port that elegant bit of AJAX from your conventional web to your mobile web, you will only create headaches for yourself.
  • ome browsers do support various levels of JavaScript, but as a developer you should not expect it to work across all devices.
  • retty heavy processor hog, so continuous scripting can drain a battery fast
  • mobile browser support for stylesheets varies greatly.
  • keep things simple.
  • most mobile devices default to their own font sizes and families regardless of styling. Thus, when working on the Siminn project we made no attempt to influence font size or family. In cases where we wanted a larger font, we simply relied on the generic XHTML heading elements.
  • he inclusion of font-size=smaller in the body tag worked as a kind of global reset for font sizes in every device we tested. With this little bit of code we were able to sufficiently reduce the default font size and thus more faithfully reproduce the design that we had been tasked with coding.
  • XHTML-MP - the mobile web subset of XHTML - is fully supported on most modern devices.
  • You can't read 2 books and several articles about mobile web development and cover everything. Much of the effort is trial and error. When starting out, emulators are a good way to get a rough idea of how the site will work. It gives you some feel for the navigation, architecture and flow of the site, but the look and feel varies from the emulator to the real device. The best thing you can do is get a few real phones to test on. I'm sure between yourself, co-workers and a few friends, you can manage to test your site on a good cross-section of the phones out there. Finally, there is some help. The W3C mobile web initiative does have a checklist to see how well your site is doing and so does dev.mobi - if you take heed of these two lists, your site should give a quality experience to most customers.
Vernon Fowler

WebAIM: Usable and Accessible Form Validation and Error Recovery - 0 views

webaim.org/...formvalidation

validation accessibility usability forms errors aria

shared by Vernon Fowler on 16 Mar 17 - No Cached
  • Errors on top
  • As one would guess, the "Errors on top" approach causes the error message to appear before the form. When presented, focus should generally be set directly to this error message. This allows screen reader and keyboard users to immediately access the error message without having to find it amongst the rest of the page contents. The message should also be visually apparent. Focus can be set to the message with client-side scripting using JavaScript focus() or similar, or the server-generated page can include an anchor name in the URI (e.g., http://myserver.com/form.php#errormessage) which will set focus directly to a named anchor or element id located at the beginning of the feedback message.
  • also helpful to inform the user as to the number of errors that were detected
  • ...2 more annotations...
  • provide a link within the error message that will set focus to the appropriate form control
  • Regardless of the mechanism used to identify and recover from form errors, aria-invalid="true" should generally be set on each invalid form control. This attribute causes screen readers to identify the control as being "invalid" or in need of attention.
Vernon Fowler

10 colour contrast checking tools to improve the accessibility of your design | 456 Ber... - 3 views

www.456bereastreet.com/...e_accessibility_of_your_design

accessibility color tools webdesign css validator usability webdev validation test testing design contrast resources

shared by Vernon Fowler on 12 Oct 10 - Cached
  • online tool simulates colour blindness on an image that you upload or on a web page that you specify, while the Photoshop plugin changes the colours of the document you are working on
Sandra Earl

Forget WYSIWYG editors - use WYSIWYM instead | 456 Berea Street - 0 views

www.456bereastreet.com/...yg_editors_use_wysiwym_instead

accessibility WYSIWYG

shared by Sandra Earl on 12 Oct 10 - Cached
  • A huge problem with almost every CMS in existence is the extremely poor quality of the code produced by their WYSIWYG editors.
  • Since visual gadgetry like WYSIWYG editors sells, every CMS has to have one.
  • That, in turn, makes it necessary for Web professionals who want to reduce the risk of clients unknowingly ruining the website’s semantics and accessibility to disable features and implement more or less advanced code cleaning procedures. It is a mess.
  • ...4 more annotations...
  • Because of the problems caused by WYSIWYG editors I have toyed with the idea of providing a much simpler interface for content editors. Markdown, BBCode, and Textile are a few possible solutions that ensure valid markup and increase the likelihood of it being semantic. The problem would be making clients accept working that way, directly editing pseudo markup. Most clients wouldn’t, so that option is ruled out.
  • But there is another kind of editor that is better suited than WYSIWYG for content-driven, client-edited sites - the WYSIWYM (What You See Is What You Mean) editor. In Visually Editing Semantics - What You See Is What You Mean, Peter Krantz mentions one such editor: WYMeditor.
  • From the WYMeditor site: Our goal is to create a XHTML strict web-based editor which will be usable on many platforms, whith the help of the Open Source Community.
  • There are a few limitations, of course. This is an early version, after all. Besides the issues Peter notes in his post about WYMeditor, here are a few more things I noticed: Table accessibility. There is no way to add elements and attributes (th, caption, scope, etc) needed for accessibility to data tables. Table resizing. It is possible to size tables by dragging handles. Doing so is reflected in the markup. That needs to be filtered out at some stage before saving the page to the database. Incorrect nesting of lists. When you create nested lists, the current list element is closed before the next level ul or ol is inserted.
Sandra Earl

97% of websites still inaccessible | 456 Berea Street - 0 views

www.456bereastreet.com/...of_websites_still_inaccessible

accessibility laws statistics general standards testing

shared by Sandra Earl on 12 Oct 10 - Cached
  • United Nations Global Audit of Web Accessibility, conducted by accessibility agency Nomensa on behalf of the United Nations, shows that 97 percent of websites fail to meet the most basic accessibility requirements.
  • A story on the BBC News website, ‘Most websites’ failing disabled, notes that 93 percent did not provide alternative text for all images, 73 percent relied on JavaScript for important functionality, and 98 percent of the sites did not use valid markup.
Sandra Earl

WebAIM: Screen Reader Survey Results - 0 views

webaim.org/...screenreadersurvey

accessibility vision blindness screen reader WebAIM general FUSION09

shared by Sandra Earl on 12 Oct 10 - Cached
  • We received 1121 valid responses to the screen reader survey, which was conducted Dec. 2008 - Jan. 2009.
  • Skip to content22% Skip to main content28%
  • 33 respondents (2.9%) reported being both deaf and blind.
  • ...33 more annotations...
  • Please rate your computer proficiency Response% of Respondents Expert22% Advanced44% Intermediate27% Beginner8%
  • Please rate your screen reader proficiency Response% of Respondents Expert17% Advanced41% Intermediate32% Beginner9%
  • Screen Reader Usage
  • Of the 1121 respondents, 74% use JAWS, 23% use Window-Eyes, 8% use NVDA, and 6% use VoiceOver. While several other screen readers were reported, these were the most prominently reported. Individual versions of screen readers are not yet computed, but generally the majority of users are using the most up-to-date version of their screen reader.
  • How soon do you update your screen reader after a new version is released? Upgrade Window% of Respondents Immediately41% First 6 months25% 6-12 months9% 1-2 years9% 2-3 years4% 3+ years6% No response6%
  • How customized are your screen reader settings? (e.g., changed verbosity, installed scripts, etc.) Response% of Respondents A lot29% Somewhat40% Slightly21% Not at all7% No response4%
  • a lot or some customization was reported by only 27.6% of respondents with no disability versus 71.4% for those that reported blindness.
  • 78% of respondents reported using a screen reader on a desktop computer, 54% use a screen reader on a laptop, and 12% use a screen reader on a mobile phone.
  • No respondents who use screen readers for evaluation reported using a screen reader on a mobile device.
  • Which web browser(s) do you currently use with a screen reader? Browser% of Respondents IE633% IE768% IE82% Firefox39% Safari6%
  • Respondents with no disability were nearly twice as likely to list Firefox as blind respondents - 66% to 37%.
  • The percentage of Safari users is over double that of the overall population - this may be due in part to the fact that some in the Mac community actively solicited survey participation and encouraged respondents to indicate their Safari use, perhaps partially due to feeling snubbed because we didn't list them with IE and Firefox as direct choices.
  • When first accessing a new, unfamiliar home page, I'm most likely to... Response% of Respondents Read through the home page46% Navigate through or listen to the links on the page35% Use the Search to find what I'm looking for13% Look for a site map or site index3% No Response2%
  • Interestingly, the more proficient screen reader users are more likely to read through the home page and use links less often than less proficient screen reader users. This may be due to faster reading speeds for more experienced users. The home page strategies used were very similar regardless of proficiency, disability, or amount of screen reader use.
  • I use "skip to content" or "skip navigation" links... Response% of Respondents Whenever they're available22% Often16% Sometimes28% Seldom19% Never10% No Response4%
  • Some questions were of a technical nature and we understand that many participants may not have been very technically savvy. Responses may also be based upon user experiences with web content that is generally inaccessible. We cannot help but wonder if responses may have been different if screen reader interactions with web content were typically very positive.
  • I use Access keys... Response% of Respondents Whenever they're available22% Often16% Sometimes28% Seldom19% Never10%
  • I navigate by headings... Response% of Respondents Whenever they're available52% Often24%
  • 76% always or often navigating by headings when they are available.
  • I use site search functionality... Response% of Respondents Whenever it's available26% Often25% Sometimes31%
  • Find the word "Search"18% Jump to the first text/edit field on the page25%
  • Jump to the first form element in a page36%
  • Proficient screen reader users were more than twice as likely to jump directly to the form or text/edit field than less proficient users. Less proficient users were nearly three times more likely to use more manual methods (reading, tabbing, or finding) than more proficient users.
  • a majority of respondents seldom or never use site maps. There was no marked difference in the use of site maps across screen reader proficiency or disability. In general, it appears that site maps may be beneficial, but are not commonly accessed by screen reader users.
  • Text-only versions are always used by many and never used by many. As such, it is very difficult to interpret the value they have for screen reader users. More proficient screen reader users were much less likely to use text-only versions than less proficient users. This may suggest that proficient users employ sufficient techniques to render the main version acceptable to them. Or, it may suggest that proficient users do not gain value in using text-only versions, which are often less than optimal.
  • If content is identified as being "for screen reader users", how often do you use it? Response% of Respondents Whenever it's available38% Often15% Sometimes25% Seldom13%
  • A closer analysis, however, reveals that pop-up windows are reported as very difficult twice as often by less proficient screen reader users than with higher proficiency. Alternatively, more proficient users were three times more likely to indicate that pop-up windows are not at all difficult. This shows that less proficient screen reader users (which represent 41% of respondents) have more difficult experiences with pop-up windows.
  • Firefox users were much more likely to give a favorable response, perhaps a reflection of Firefox support for ARIA, etc. Evaluators and those without disabilities were nearly twice as likely to indicate that these applications are not very or not at all accessible than those that always use screen readers or have disabilities. This may suggest that these applications are actually more accessible than evaluators believe them to be, or alternatively, that screen reader users with disabilities are less knowledgeable about the true inaccessibility of these technologies.
  • 66% of evaluators preferred that the image be ignored, compared to only 28% of those that always user a screen reader. Similarly, 65% of those with no disability preferred that the image be ignored, compared to 29% of those with disabilities.
  • If a web page contains a photo of the White House, I prefer that the image be identified as... Response% of Respondents Photo of the White House80%
  • 69.4% of evaluators found them difficult compared to only 42.6% of those that always use a screen reader. Those with higher screen reader proficiency naturally found these links easier.
  • 71.5% of screen reader users reported that Flash is difficult
  • While the majority (58%) of users reported that frames are easy, those that are blind were 3 1/2 times more likely to indicate that they are easy than those with no disability. Similarly, those that always use a screen reader reported frames as easy nearly 3 times more often than evaluators. This perhaps suggests a misconception among those that do not have disabilities that frames are very inaccessible when in fact those with disabilities find them easy.
1 - 19 of 19
Showing 20▼ items per page