Re: iFrame titles - are they needed?

Hey folks,

Mark Rogers created a good overview of exactly how iframes behave in
different browsers. The tricky part is that every browser does it
differently. You can find the info here:
https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1367#issue-650894838

There is also some test data that Daniel Montalvo created here:
https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/pull/1269/files#r421370248

The only way to make an iframe completely hidden in Chrome, Firefox and
Safari is if it has tabindex="-1" and if it has nothing in the
accessibility tree. Otherwise, if the iframe doesn't have tabindex="-1" it
creates a tab stop where nothing is announced in Firefox. If the iframe
isn't empty, VoiceOver in Safari will let you interact with the frame.

The current ACT rule doesn't explain this well enough. We are working on an
update for it.


On Wed, Jul 15, 2020 at 8:44 PM Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@levelaccess.com>
wrote:

> > Long story short: I'd be in favour of making it clear that iframes do
> NOT necessarily NEED to have a title/accname.
>
> I'd be fine with that as well but we'd need to clearly define in what
> situations it is and is not required to have an accessible name.
> * If the iFrame is in the focus order
> * * If the iFrame itself must be in the focus order to allow scrolling of
> content
> * If it visually appears as a separate unit
> * If it does/does not have role presentation/none
> * If it acts like a single component unit of operation
> * If it's embedded third party content and marked as such visually
> * Advertisement marked as such
> * Whether the iFrame has a document with a title element in it that acts
> as the name of the inner document.
>
> Jonathan
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2020 9:48 AM
> To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
> Subject: Re: iFrame titles - are they needed?
>
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not
> click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know
> the content is safe.
>
>
> We had this LENGTHY discussion here ages ago
> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/929
>
> I agree not all iframes need an accessible name/title, when they behave
> like they're part of the host page and are not acting as a distinct
> self-contained document or control/complex widget in its own right.
>
> There's been various discussions like
> https://twitter.com/stevefaulkner/status/1257605397705359363 as well.
>
> And situations like these, where buttons are wrapped in individual iframes
> (for ease of deployment), but being forced to add an accessible name/title
> to them leads to horribly verbose and unnecessary AT output
> https://github.com/mdo/github-buttons/pull/148
>
> Long story short: I'd be in favour of making it clear that iframes do NOT
> necessarily NEED to have a title/accname.
>
> P
> --
> Patrick H. Lauke
>
> https://www.splintered.co.uk/ | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
> https://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | https://www.deviantart.com/redux
> twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
>
>

-- 
*Wilco Fiers*
Axe for Web product owner - Co-facilitator WCAG-ACT - Chair ACT-R