 |
 |
However I'd also point out that if that class, instead of being simply 'hidden', had been similar to Bootstrap's "sr-only", or even a more fully spelled out "screen-reader-only", the later developer would have been more likely to wonder "Hmm, maybe that's not simply hidden but means something else, maybe I should try to look up or ask someone what it means if I'm not sure" Attempting self-documenting code always matters for successor developers, not just in issues of accessibility. And labelling something simply 'hidden' that is not fact always hidden is misleading your successors. I mean, in your example they left a comment with their thought process -- the thing was labelled 'hidden' after all. Jonathan On 9/17/14 5:03 PM, Will Martin wrote: > To digress a bit from LibGuides ... > > The biggest problem with accessibility is not technical: it's cultural. > Producing HTML that meets basic accessibility tests is not all THAT > difficult. The harder part is setting up a culture where everyone -- > everyone! -- who writes content for the web is trained on how to do it > accessibly. A content editor who is clueless about accessibility can > very easily screw up their pages without even knowing they're doing so. > > The same applies to developers. Once while reviewing a library site's > code, I came across a chunk of HTML that looked like this (roughly): > > <!-- > I don't know why this was here? It's invisible! Disabling. > > <a href="#top" class="hidden">Return to top</a> > --> > > An earlier developer had put that in to assist screen reader users in > getting back to the top of the page if they wanted. The "hidden" class > was a correctly written class for hiding content while leaving it > available for screen reader users. But the next person to fill that job > wasn't trained on WHY and took it out again. > > If you really want to commit to accessibility, it needs to be a > criterion in the job description for your developers, and there needs to > be a training process in place for anyone who produces content for your > site. Probably with refreshers at intervals. > > Will > >