Archive index

A11y Slackers Gitter Channel Archive 24th of August 2017

What fresh hell is THIS now? - Patrick Lauke
  1. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Aug 24 00:05
    [williebike]
    Did you see this? http://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/president-trump-s-doj-takes-website-37788/
  2. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Aug 24 00:16
    [karlgroves] @williebike Yup. Sad, but that isn’t going to stop anything.
  3. [karlgroves] The thing is, web accessibility lawsuits date back to 2000. The article you cited discusses the lack of clarity around whether the Web is regarded as a place of public accommodation. While the DOJ definitely needs to provide clarity on that, the on-the-ground reality is that there have been hundreds of lawsuits and hundreds more unpublicized legal settlements around web accessibility since 2000 - most of which in the last 5 years or so
  4. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Aug 24 01:36

    [spell] Hi A11y peeps. I have Level Access's AMP reporting back the following error: This video element does not have a mechanism that allows an accessible name value to be calculated. Can somebody elaborate on it? This is the code. Am I missing something here?

    <video id="video" crossorigin="anonymous" preload="none" poster="/v1\_0/media/case-study-vmware.jpg" controls="">

    <source src="/v1\_0/media/case-study-vmware.mp4" type="video/mp4">
    <track label="English" kind="subtitles" srclang="en" src="/v1\_0/media/case-study-vmware.vtt">

    <!-- fallback -->

    <a href="/v1\_0/media/case-study-vmware.mp4"><img src="/v1\_0/media/case-study-vmware.jpg" alt="VMware Case Study Video"></a>

    </video>

  5. LauraOU
    @LauraOU
    Aug 24 12:18
    While many screen readers won't read it, seems like the aria-label would fulfill that requirement. See https://www.powermapper.com/tests/screen-readers/media/video-aria-label/
  6. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Aug 24 12:21
    [karlgroves] I would call into question the usefulness of a test rule that the satisfaction of which would not benefit anyone
  7. LauraOU
    @LauraOU
    Aug 24 13:02
    I would say doing so falls under 4.1, "The purpose of this guideline is to support compatibility with current and future user agents, especially assistive technologies (AT)."
  8. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Aug 24 13:21
    [karlgroves] At best, such a rule in a testing product should serve as a “Hint” or “Notice” and not an error. Too often tools throw out things like this and it winds up making people chase their tails. It is disruptive, confusing, and wastes people’s time.
  9. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Aug 24 13:27
    [karlgroves] My favorite example is from the Open Ajax Alliance Rulesets which will throw out 13 new issues merely by finding a <video> element on the page. To be clear: The rule only looks for <video>. That’s it. Then it vomits forth with 13 new things, most of which are basically “Hey, since you have a video, you should make sure it doesn’t autoplay” etc. Don’t get me wrong, these are nice things to be mindful of. But there has to be a very clear and obvious difference to the user regarding what they’re seeing so that they have the freedom to ignore things that don’t point to a real, solid problem
  10. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Aug 24 14:51
    [spell] Thanks @LauraOU and @karlgroves. To be clear, it's not listed as an error, but with a severity level (5/10). I'm leaning on the side of passing it as a false positive until I have more clear direction. I thought about adding aria-label, but I am always concerned about adding ARIA where it may not truly be needed. I also don't want to add it for sake of satisfying a scan. I'll bring it up with Level Access and see what they have to say about it, too.
  11. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Aug 24 15:04
    [spell] So, it seems a couple of screen readers do support it, but is it truly needed? I honestly don't think it is something that should be required or flagged as an issue because it is highly probable that most of the web will not include it. Shouldn't the success of it's accessibility be inherent and based on surrounding content?
  12. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Aug 24 16:58
    [quidkid] for WCAG do we need both transcripts and closed captions or are closed captions sufficient? if not, can anyone help me figure out where in WCAG AA it says we need both?
  13. [quidkid] http://webaim.org/techniques/captions/
  14. [quidkid] In order to be fully accessible to the maximum number of users, web multimedia should include both synchronized captions AND a descriptive transcript.
  15. [quidkid] but im not sure if that is in WCAG? I’m of course on the side of pushing for both, but I want to convince the client with some hard evidence too for wcag aa compliance
  16. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Aug 24 17:10
    [karlgroves] @quidkid Both are required
  17. [karlgroves] @williebike Follow up to yesterday’s comment:
    http://www.adatitleiii.com/2017/08/website-accessibility-lawsuit-filings-still-going-strong/
  18. [ghanek] WCAG 2.0 Guideline 1.2 covers these, and they are A, not AA.
    https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG20/quickref/ makes it easy to rapidly find WCAG info based on tags, filters, and so forth.
  19. [quidkid] thank you so much!!!!
  20. LauraOU
    @LauraOU
    Aug 24 17:20
    @spell can't you just put a title on it and be done with it?
  21. Chris O'Brien
    @a11ycob
    Aug 24 17:21
    @quidkid You really should accommodate for both captioning and transcripts. The audiences for each can differ - think Deaf Blind.
  22. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Aug 24 17:24
    [spell] @quidkid While I can't speak for your implementation, creating them is usually a cinch with services provided by the likes of rev.com. I use them all of the time.
  23. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Aug 24 17:34
    [spell] @LauraOU, Yeah, I suppose I could, but I think the deeper question here for me is: Is it even necessary? Of course, I want to do what is right, but I don't want it to turn into a situation where I am constantly having to remind devs to add such things (Think iframes and titles). Perhaps, if it were a standalone video on the page, with no context, it might make sense to add ARIA or title, but if what the video is about can be explained via surrounding context of the page, I don't think it's really necessary to include it.
  24. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Aug 24 17:44
    [vavroom] Surrounding context isn’t necessarily as helpful as all that.
  25. [marcysutton] I add a title attribute to my video tags as a best practice.
  26. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Aug 24 17:59
    [spell] @marcysutton Do more AT's support title over aria-label on video? @vavroom Yeah, I can see that. I just had a revelation now. Perhaps it is best to always include a label, because we never know where, and in what context, our videos may be placed. That alone may be what solidifies my own decision to use as a best practice moving forward.
  27. [marcysutton] I'd have to do a thorough test for it, but title is part of accessible name calculation. And it shows for mouse users too unlike aria-label
  28. [spell] @marcysutton Thanks. Sure, if ever comes up in your travels, it might be a good information to have available. Good point about mouse users.
  29. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Aug 24 18:04
    [marcysutton] I don't see how it would hurt, especially if you're talking about surrounding content also giving context.
  30. [spell] No, not at all. Good conversation to have and why I love this place so. :)
  31. [spell] Thanks you, all!
  32. [jamesn] Lots of people would not want the tooltip appearing over the top of a video. I can imagine UX folks freaking out about that kind of thing
  33. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Aug 24 18:11
    [marcysutton] that's just silly.
  34. [marcysutton] (in my opinion)
  35. [jamesn] my opinion may be the same as yours ;)
  36. [marcysutton] When I embed a video personally I turn off the title overlays to have a cleaner UI since there is surrounding content.
  37. [jamesn] IMO whether you need an accessible name on a video at all depends on the page. If there are multiple videos then IMO you probably should have something but if there is just one and the video is the entire purpose of the page then IMO an accessible name is not necessary on that video
  38. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Aug 24 18:31
    [spell] @jamesn I once thought as you do (about 30 minutes ago), but then I thought about how often I see my code floating around on other work related projects. If others are going to leverage my code, then I feel obliged to ensure it is as accessible as it can be. I think all developers should aspire to do the same. And as @marcysutton said, it doesn't hurt to add it. :)
  39. [jamesn] @spell I think that is really situational
  40. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Aug 24 18:39
    [spell] @jamesn Certainly. We all have to come to our own conclusions about how some things in accessibility should work. Especially in those gray areas. I think it adds value and I dig knowing that AT's will have a little extra info there no matter where my video may end up. :)
  41. [jamesn] only if they copy the entire HTML fragment - if they just take the video file you don't have that guarantee
  42. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Aug 24 18:48
    [spell] @jamesn Yes, obviously. That does not deter my decision to not include them now, though. For my situation, I think it is now best to include.
  43. [jamesn] @spell not trying to dissuade you. Every situation is different.
  44. [spell] @jamesn And it likely a habit I'll carry over to personal work.
  45. [spell] @jamesn It's cool. No worries.
  46. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Aug 24 18:58
    [spell] While we are on subject, does anybody have good examples of sites that use HTML5 video to full effect, with subs, captions, descriptions and transcripts, etc. Just looking for good examples to share with my team. Thanks!
  47. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Aug 24 19:05
    [spell] @marcysutton How do you turn off the title overlays?
  48. [marcysutton] It depends on the player, but on both Vimeo and Youtube you can change it in the embed settings
  49. [spell] Ah, okay. Thanks!
  50. [marcysutton] I wish Youtube would freaking fix their inaccessible buttons in their embedded player though.
  51. [spell] I heard about that recently. Yeah, that would be cool.
  52. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Aug 24 19:10
    [quidkid] is it worth using Bootstrap for WCAG AA sites? I’ve avoided frameworks in favor of having complete control for keyboard accessibility.

  53. [gokatgo] We’ve used VideoJS in some of our projects. There’s a pretty decent example here: http://videojs.com/advanced/

    Check out the Elephant’s Dream example film to see how subs/captions/descriptions were used. In our particular use case, we added transcripts into a separate container on the page, which could be expanded/collapsed on button press.

  54. [spell] @gokatgo Nice! Thank you!
  55. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Aug 24 19:16
    [gokatgo] You’re welcome.
  56. [spell] @gokatgo Ah, excellent. I was looking for examples of good description usage and this certainly delivers. Coool.
  57. [spell] Plus, what the heck is the movie? LOL.
  58. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Aug 24 19:23
    [kivi] You forgot this: (trollface emoji)
  59. [spell] @gokatgo I know Rev can provide subs and transcripts, but do you know if they also provide descriptions? If not, do you know of anybody who might specialize in creating video descriptions?
  60. zakim-robot
    @zakim-robot
    Aug 24 19:29
    [gokatgo] Have you tried 3PlayMedia? http://www.3playmedia.com/
  61. [spell] @gokatgo I have not, but I will check them out. Thanks!
  62. [gokatgo] Different departments here use them… worth looking at!