Add audits in the Jupyter ecosystem

[steff456]

This PR,

• Creates a documentation page with the zoom audit
• Creates a documentation page with the keyboard navigation audit
• Creates a documentation section for the audits
• Links the new page for adding it to the side menu
• Links the new section for it to be rendered in the side menu
• Adds reference to other audits that happened in the last 2 years

This PR is part of #125

---

📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://jupyter-accessibility--133.org.readthedocs.build/en/133/

[tonyfast]

is there anyway to include other audits that have been done? it seems diminishing of other's efforts to no include them. at the very least, i think it would be working mentioning:

• Accessibility Issues Needing Addressing for WCAG 2.1 compliance (As of Version 2.2.6) jupyterlab/jupyterlab#9399
• Accessibility Issues Needing Addressing for WCAG 2.1 compliance (As of Version 7.0.0a15) notebook#6800

[steff456]

I'm going to add them in follow up PRs, please see #125

I want to stick with one audit per PR for it to be easier to review

[tonyfast]

thanks for sharing such a thorough roadmap. those improvements look great!

[steff456]

Edit: I pushed the changes for all the audits, so now this PR will add documentation for all the accessibility audits

[gabalafou]

My opinion is that the audits page should mostly just link out to content elsewhere, rather than adding / duplicating content to the docs.

[gabalafou]

If I were someone coming to this page for the first time, I might wonder why some of the audits are in GitHub issues, while two are in these docs. Is there some way we can address that? Or maybe put all the audit links in one list, rather than splitting them into two lists?

I'm not sure what the best approach is, but currently this looks confusing to me.

[trallard]

Agree - the current structure (two lists, some with in-depth content other without) make this confusing at the least, and signals some sort of "hierarchy" / "importance at worst"

[steff456]

Should I only add the links to the github issues/PR?

Still we need to add the new two pages to a toctree, if not Sphinx will not include them and will not be reachable.

[steff456]

Edit: I removed the single audit pages and just left the list of all the audits

[trallard]

This PR needs some restructuring, as discussed separately the main content is in the issues themselves, these docs should point to those, avoid repeating content and if needed provide only essential context.

[trallard]

Agree - the current structure (two lists, some with in-depth content other without) make this confusing at the least, and signals some sort of "hierarchy" / "importance at worst"

[isabela-pf]

I'm really happy to see these collected somewhere. Thank you for making this a priority! And thank you for the descriptive link text. I love that the dates are made clear.

This looks good to me, and it previews well. I'd like to merge it, but GitHub is telling me there are changes still requested. It looks like the changes have been made but not rereviewed after, so I'll check back and see if I can merge.