-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 789
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
fix(aria-roles): correct abstract roles (types) for aria-roles #4421
Conversation
Too many aria roles were set to widget or otherwise were incorrect, added a comment source for where I got my information for which abstract roles were the type of which roles Refs: #4371
Previously there was a test to confirm a table with role of application was a data table, but the spec indicates that has an anstract role of structure meaning this should be a structure table instead This commit is just a test correction Refs: #4421
widget not inline rule corrected isWidgetType check to consider composite widget types
@WilcoFiers unsure how to test this PR's changes against the comment you left in the referenced issue, I don't see a cookie notice on the horse insurance website. Any guidance is appreciated. @straker I feel reasonably good about this change but I'm a bit unsure if it fully addresses the original issue as it seemed fairly open ended |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for taking this on. Addressing the change should mostly be covered by updating the roles, specifically of tabpanel
.
https://www.w3.org/WAI/ARIA/1.2/class-diagram/rdf_model.svg is an interesting resource. I've not seen it before. It's also hard to follow sometimes what line belongs to what, so I hope I parsed it correctly.
@@ -169,7 +170,7 @@ const ariaRoles = { | |||
prohibitedAttrs: ['aria-label', 'aria-labelledby'] | |||
}, | |||
dialog: { | |||
type: 'widget', | |||
type: 'window', |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Probably structure
again as not a landmark
type: 'window', | |
type: 'structure', |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Since we said window
is fine for alertdialog
I assume it's fine here as well
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree with Ava. Since this is window
in the spec, lets have it consistent.
@@ -18,7 +18,8 @@ const matchesFns = [ | |||
]; | |||
|
|||
function isWidgetType(vNode) { | |||
return getRoleType(vNode) === 'widget'; | |||
const roleType = getRoleType(vNode); | |||
return roleType === 'widget' || roleType === 'composite'; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Undo this change since we'll leave listbox
and combobox
as widgets
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Undid this change 2d185f6
Will also need to add exception to |
- learned sometimes we intentionally spec change - added `window` as a supported type, and `composite` which was missing from the readme - undid my change to `isWidgetType` Refs: #4371
test change was only for data tables, but we didn't want to keep that type change Refs: #4371
add `window` to has-widget-role, renamed Refs: #4371
better pass/fail english message, removed outdated translations Refs: #4371
@straker added an exception to |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can you add integration tests for:
- Show that target-size no longer applies to some of the things that are no longer widgets. Most importantly alertdialog
- Show that target-size no longer treats elements with those roles as neighbor targets
- Show which roles are still allowed to be focusable under valid-scrollable-semantics, and which are not
lib/checks/aria/has-widget-role.json
Outdated
@@ -1,12 +0,0 @@ | |||
{ | |||
"id": "has-widget-role", | |||
"evaluate": "has-widget-role-evaluate", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Removing a check is a breaking change. Apologies, I should have mentioned that when we talked about it. I don't think we should be updating this check at all. It would be better to add the roles that are no longer allowed under has-widget-role as an allowed role in valid-scrollable-semantics
.
* @memberof checks | ||
* @return {Boolean} True if the element uses a `widget`, `composite`, or `window` abstract role (type). False otherwise. | ||
*/ | ||
// # TODO: change to abstract role for widget and window |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not sure what you mean by this. Is this supposed to be here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not intentional, reverted a07c488
@@ -169,7 +170,7 @@ const ariaRoles = { | |||
prohibitedAttrs: ['aria-label', 'aria-labelledby'] | |||
}, | |||
dialog: { | |||
type: 'widget', | |||
type: 'window', |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree with Ava. Since this is window
in the spec, lets have it consistent.
@@ -17,13 +18,13 @@ | |||
*/ | |||
const ariaRoles = { | |||
alert: { | |||
type: 'widget', | |||
type: 'structure', |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This creates a problem for focus-order-semantics
. With this change, the following is going to start failing. I don't think we should want that.
<div role="alert" tabindex="0"> Hello world </div>
This is what we talked about on Thursday. We'll need some way to exempt these roles that are no longer considered as widgets in the focus-order-semantics
rule. I think the best way to do that is just to add them to the VALID_ROLES_FOR_SCROLLABLE_REGIONS
object in valid-scrollable-semantics-evaluate
.
@@ -816,7 +819,7 @@ const ariaRoles = { | |||
superclassRole: ['section'] | |||
}, | |||
timer: { | |||
type: 'widget', | |||
type: 'structure', |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
When you're adding roles to valid-scrollable-semantics
, I think you can leave this one out. role=timer
doesn't seem like it should be focusable.
@@ -340,7 +343,7 @@ const ariaRoles = { | |||
superclassRole: ['landmark'] | |||
}, | |||
marquee: { | |||
type: 'widget', | |||
type: 'structure', |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
When you're adding roles to valid-scrollable-semantics
, I think you can leave this one out. role=marquee
doesn't seem like it should be focusable.
axe.testUtils | ||
.getCheckEvaluate('has-widget-or-window-role') | ||
.call(checkContext, currentNode); | ||
const roles = { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This feels a little brittle. Generally what we do is we have the unit tests just check the code works. One or two examples of each role type is enough. And then we have fairly extensive integration tests. Those are a little more telling.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'll be reverting this change since the desire is to not change this check. EDIT: Reverted a07c488
Though I believe this change was not brittle. This was a refactor from ~500 lines of tests to ~100 that checked the same things, but it was difficult to parse by a person before. I found myself getting quite lost in the code previously. The underlying test code was the same with this change.
Addresses some feedback from Wilco in the PR that this isn't the change we want This reverts commit facd65f.
reflected in focus-order-semantics
…order-semantics addressing more pr feedback
This reverts commit bfa95ae.
extends prior work by accounting for all standards aria roles changes
last feedback yay
@WilcoFiers all feedback addressed :) let me know if there's anything else amiss |
### [4.9.1](v4.9.0...v4.9.1) (2024-05-06) ### Bug Fixes - Prevent errors when loading axe in a page with prototype.js - **aria-allowed-attr:** allow meter role allowed aria-\* attributes on meter element ([#4435](#4435)) ([7ac6392](7ac6392)) - **aria-allowed-role:** add gridcell, separator, slider and treeitem to allowed roles of button element ([#4398](#4398)) ([4788bf8](4788bf8)) - **aria-roles:** correct abstract roles (types) for aria-roles([#4421](#4421)) - **aria-valid-attr-value:** aria-controls & aria-haspopup incomplete ([#4418](#4418)) - fix building axe-core translation files with region locales ([#4396](#4396)) ([5c318f3](5c318f3)), closes [#4388](#4388) - **invalidrole:** allow upper and mixed case role names ([#4358](#4358)) ([105016c](105016c)), closes [#2695](#2695) - **isVisibleOnScreen:** account for position: absolute elements inside overflow container ([#4405](#4405)) ([2940f6e](2940f6e)), closes [#4016](#4016) - **label-content-name-mismatch:** better dismiss and wysiwyg symbolic text characters ([#4402](#4402)) - **region:** Decorative images ignored by region rule ([#4412](#4412)) - **target-size:** ignore descendant elements in shadow dom ([#4410](#4410)) ([6091367](6091367)) - **target-size:** pass for element that has nearby elements that are obscured ([#4422](#4422)) ([3a90bb7](3a90bb7)), closes [#4387](#4387) This PR was opened by a robot 🤖 🎉 (And updated by @WilcoFiers )
Too many aria roles were set to widget or otherwise were incorrect, added a comment source for where I got my information for which abstract roles were the type of other aria roles
Fix: #4371