Hi, I’m Laurence. I’m a Glaswegian web developer using modern web standards to create user-focused, responsive websites. I also make music, play records and ping pongs. This is my online home; a playground for coding fun and place to share thoughts on the web, music and more.
At our fortnightly Accessibility Forum at work, we just had a great discussion about modal dialogues. We started by discussing whether focus should be completely trapped within the modal or if the user should at least have access to the browser toolbar (we decided on the former). We then moved onto a general discussion on the pros and cons of modals, which led me to share MODALZ MODALZ MODALZ with the team.
At work we’ve recently been shown a couple of design proposals where truncation was presented as a solution to the perceived problem of long and unwieldy content, for example a long description in a table cell. However following good discussions, as a wider team we’re now leaning towards avoiding truncation as an approach. Truncation can present accessibility issues and as Karen McGrane says truncation is not a good content strategy. I reckon we should just let long content wrap, and design for that to look OK.
In this video we go over the 3 pro tips from Liam Pitchford that helped transform Dan’s backhand!
The :has() CSS pseudo-class represents an element if any of the selectors passed as parameters match at least one element.
But, it's more than a "parent" selector. That's a nice way to market it. The not so appealing way might be the "conditional environment" selector. But that doesn't have quite the same ring to it. How about the "family" selector?
Tetralogical are doing a great series of articles on running inclusive research. Their latest is about recruiting participants and covers whether you should recruit people with disabilities as part of your testing and if so who, and how many, and how to recruit them.