Skip to content

Tweak language around modal dialogs #4381

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

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

patrickhlauke
Copy link
Member

Closes #4185

Note that this only softens/expands some of the example language in the understanding documents. The original issue #4185 seems to conflate non-normative examples in a non-normative document with requirements of how modal dialogs should be implemented ... they are not. They provide examples of appropriate focus order and absence of keyboard traps. They are not the only ways in which focus order or absence of keyboard traps can be achieved. Examples are non-exhaustive, and there is no need - in my view - to expand these further to specifically address variations that result from different behaviours related to <dialog>

Copy link

netlify bot commented May 5, 2025

Deploy Preview for wcag2 ready!

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit 1088e08
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/sites/wcag2/deploys/68188b69b51d900008b67f7b
😎 Deploy Preview https://deploy-preview-4381--wcag2.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile
Toggle QR Code...

QR Code

Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

@mbgower
Copy link
Contributor

mbgower commented May 23, 2025

I'm a bit concerned about these changes. Pretty consistently in our examples, we are listing best behaviour/practices. As you note here (and in the issue), someone misconstruing an example with a normative edict shouldn't necessarily lead us to made the examples less clear or confusing (which I personally find these to be).
I'd prefer to leave as is, or lessen the change.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

SC 2.1.2 Tab looping
3 participants