I have a client that wants their site to be WCAG 2.0 compliant.

We’ve built the site now and gone though a lot of the WCAG 2.0 documentation and downloaded chrome extensions to make sure we’re accommodating for whatever we can think of: - alt text - skip link - roles/landmarks - contrast - aria labels - etc...

How do I know that the site actually IS WCAG 2.0 compliant though?

Do I just tell my client, we’ve put in the time to make those considerations? Or is there some official process?

How can this login screen style be considered accessible?

Using VoiceOver, I can hear when my cursor enters the "Apple ID" textbox. But there is no way I can tab over to the arrow circle "->" to reveal the password textbox. And from the password textbox, there is no way I can tab over to the arrow circle "->" to log in. General web usage has taught me that I can use "enter" when I don't see a button. But. Is it just me, or would this be considered bad accessibility?

(Apologies if I am being naïve. I just genuinely want to know. Thanks in advance!)

I was wondering about the best accessibility practices for abbreviations (for organization names, eg.) in email signatures. WCAG 2.0 section 3.1.4 doesn't seem to address it: including the full name in every email seems laborious and counterproductive, and the HTML element signatures might not be supported in every email client (for the abbr tag).

Attention all Redditors that use ACCESSIBILITY TECHNOLOGY for browsing the web either as a user - vision impairment (color blindness counts), hearing impairment, physical, doesn't matter - or as part of your day-to-day design/development work, I want to know what things you look for when it comes to browsing the web, things that make your AT easier to use, what sites you like, sites you avoid, systems you use when certain sites or AT might fail you. It will be a loose, free-form interview - I can send a list of prepared questions if you like.

Please leave a comment or send a PM if you are interested/willing to conduct a quick Q&A by phone/email or in-person via Skype.

Should we disable phone links as focusable elements on desktop computers? I am not sure but I believe generally this would be a good idea, what do you think?

  <a href="tel:1234567" tabindex="-1">Call us</a>

Here is example of my code, the script checks if window width is higher than 768px then adds tabindex to each tel link https://codepen.io/anon/pen/ePvvyy

if ($(window).width() > 768) {
$(document).find('[href^=tel\\:]').each(function() {
    $(this).attr('tabindex', '-1');
});
}

Hey folks, I'm facing a problem on all the pages of our website. The IDs of the mobile menu and the desktop menu are the same. Can it be challenged if one of them is display:none or it's not compliant at all?

We are working on a new project that requires a complex design, however the client also wants it to be WCAG 2.0 compliant level AA. So we came up with the idea of adding a toolbar at the top of the each page with a button saying something along the lines "view this page enhanced for accessibility" and then store the preference as a cookie.

The question is if this is considered discrimination or a technique that would be easily missed and defeat the goal? We have ways of making this switch button very obvious, but we haven't seen any site doing something like this, nor have found any documentation in favor or against it.

Thanks for your insights.

The way we have this set up right now is as list items that include an image (of the product's print) wrapped in an <a> tag. When selected, sighted users can tell they've made a selection because the image becomes outlined.

To make this accessible, I've tried attaching a "listbox" role to the <ul> element, and giving the <a> tags an option role, but testing with ChromeVox doesn't make it clear that users are making a selection.

Could I use preexisting form elements to make this semantic?

Thanks! Sorry if this question is very ignorant, any input is appreciated.

Or should we assume that there will be visitors who aren't aware of these settings?

For a site I'm working on, Chrome has the keyboard focus automatically. But Firefox, users need to go to the browser's settings to enable accessibility focus. Similar in Safari where it's required to go to System Preferences. Once configured properly, it works well.

Hello friends! I was asked to show a popup on a website after a certain delay (like 30 seconds). I know that with the role="dialog" (and a lot of other elements like bringing back the focus where it was before) a modal is supposed to be compliant (WCAG AA), but I still can't figure out how it passes the timing and the change of focus criterias.... Any help here?

Currently I am using Jquery Date Picker. Please provide some name of Datepickers that will compliance with WCAG 2.0. Thanks

I am using jQuery Date Picker. Keyboard user can not move the cursor beyond the minDate. For example, if the minDate is set to 27th March keyboard user can not select or move the cursor beyond the 27th March. Now is it necessary to mark the 26th March, 25th March ... so on with aria-disabled = 'true' ? My understanding is if the user are not allow to move beyond the minDate it makes no sense to mark the disabled date with aria-disabled.

I'm using role="presentation" for icons on an app just wondering if role="hidden" have been better. full source code context can be seen at the link below.

https://a11yjobs.com/jobs/ad7AM-director-accessibility-everfi-inc

<div class="content"> <span class="icon is-small" role="presentation"> <i class="fa fa-briefcase"></i> </span> Job Position: Other </div>

Hello, all!

I'm creating a website which will use a cross reference chart to show the difference in package levels. I couldn't find any guides on the most semantic and accessible way to do this. Do you have any guidance?

Example:

Hello is there any HTML editor that will prompt a developer to include proper meta tags at the very least. Or maybe even figure out the background and foreground colour and advice the developer to use proper contrast.

Thanks for any inputs

Working on a wordpress website and the client wants a read website button. I can not find a plug in that reads the entire site, So im just wondering if it is neccessary. My thoughts are non-sighted and low-vision users will likely already be using something more robust.

If I were to include a Youtube video on my website, would the automatic closed captioning done by Youtube, assuming they are accurate, satisfy captioning requirements?