3 ms·
Cool, but this article would have been more useful with some practical examples of things Lighthouse doesn't catch. If the point is "this automated metric isn't
by choxi 6y ago
Cool, but this article would have been more useful with some practical examples of things Lighthouse doesn't catch. If the point is "this automated metric isn't perfect", no automated metric is but how bad is it exactly?
I still don't have a sense for how bad Lighthouse is because I've never disabled all keyboard events, disabled all mouse events, or changed the high contrast stylings. The article almost makes the opposite point to me -- how bad can Lighthouse be if the only loopholes are things that would pretty obviously have accessibility issues?
The only useful examples I could see were the ones at the bottom of the article, which show up in Lighthouse next to the score.
- joan_kode 6y agoThe article repeatedly states that it's not about Lighthouse and that there's nothing wrong with Lighthouse. The point is that your website can be completely inaccessible and no amount of automated testing will detect it. You need user testing, that's all. The "practical examples" to take away are simple: for a start, make sure that your (human) testers can read and navigate your website. Seems practical enough.
- imtringued 6y agoYou didn't understand the article. The article doesn't contain a single loophole. Each of those features has legitimate use cases and it is impossible to detect whether they are illegitimate. Just look at the first example. It straight up denies access to the content and the reason why lighthouse accepts it is because hiding content just hides content. Usually when content is marked hidden the user is not supposed to see it. It is therefore not a concern if a user can't see hidden content. Imagine if you had a hidden dialog that is only shown on user interaction. Any automated tool cannot tell if this is an accessibility issue or not. It's like deciding if your car should be blue or black. There is no objective answer and choosing the wrong color won't reduce your score. All the other tricks in the article follow the same pattern.
- aidenn0 6y agoMostly; I can't think of a good reason for 1px sized text.
- darekkay 6y agoThe only thing I can imagine are screen reader-only labels (although you're usually achieving this with a special "sr-only" or "visually-hidden" utility class that doesn't touch the font size)
- Izkata 6y agoPart of a CSS animation where the font size grows into place from invisible (such as for an info toggle), instead of simply popping into place?