Re: Most common new WCAG 2.1 issues found

I'd caution as well that there's likely still a high degree of 
uncertainty around how to test, what actually counts as a pass/fail, 
what something does/doesn't apply to. Something that will even out over 
time, no doubt...but for many auditors, this is uncharted territory 
until they get more familiar with spotting common patterns of failure etc.

P

On 20/08/2018 12:01, Alastair Campbell wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> 
> A little aneq-data-point, I asked on Twitter what people were finding 
> came up most in WCAG 2.1 audits from the new criteria:
> 
> https://twitter.com/alastc/status/1030455692853952512
> 
> Non-text contrast (on inputs / focus styles) came up the most for most 
> people. On a per-instance basis that isn’t too surprising, search boxes 
> are often on every page.
> 
> I’m not sure there is anything to conclude from this, but if we start 
> seeing people act on that more often, perhaps it is moving the needle.
> 
> Kind regards,
> 
> -Alastair
> 
> -- 
> 
> www.nomensa.com <http://www.nomensa.com/>
> tel: +44 (0)117 929 7333 / 07970 879 653
> follow us: @we_are_nomensa or me: @alastc
> Nomensa Ltd. King William House, 13 Queen Square, Bristol BS1 4NT
> 
> Company number: 4214477 | UK VAT registration: GB 771727411
> 

-- 
Patrick H. Lauke

www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com
twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke

Received on Monday, 20 August 2018 12:29:19 UTC