September 2022

October 2022

November 2022

December 2022

January 2023

February 2023

March 2023

April 2023

May 2023

June 2023

July 2023

August 2023

September 2023

October 2023

November 2023

December 2023

January 2024

February 2024

March 2024

April 2024

May 2024

June 2024

July 2024

August 2024

September 2024

October 2024

November 2024

December 2024

January 2025

February 2025

March 2025

April 2025

May 2025

June 2025

July 2025

August 2025

September 2025

NHS Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly ICB

Screen reader users will see links on a page listed without context, 
so you should ensure the same link text is not used to point to different web
addresses.

For example:

```html
<p>
    Learn the latest about our products: 
    <a href="/products/news">News</a>
</p>

<p>
    Learn the latest about our services: 
    <a href="/company/news">News</a>
</p>
``` 

To a screen reader who is listing links, they will only hear:

* News
* News

These links appear to be the same, but they both behave differently. 
One solution, which doesn't require the page design to change, is to add an 
`aria-label` for each link:

```html
<p>
    Learn the latest about our products: 
    <a href="/products/news" aria-label="Product news">News</a>
</p>

<p>
    Learn the latest about our services: 
    <a href="/company/news" aria-label="Company news">News</a>
</p>
``` 

Which will be heard as:

* Product news
* Company news

To pass this checkpoint, make sure that links which point to different pages 
have distinct text inside them, or that they specify ARIA labels (`aria-labelledby` or
`aria-label`), or they use hidden text only visible to screen readers
(e.g. `<span class="sr-only">...</span>`) to distinguish them from each 
other.

If links point to the same page (e.g., they redirect or use tracking
parameters, but are functionally equivalent to the user) you can ignore
this issue.

a-duplicate-link-text-for-different-destinations

Links must be defined in a specific way to be accessed by screen readers, which are used by 
blind and the partially-sighted.

To work with accessibility technologies, links must contain both machine-readable text, and 
a `href` attribute. If a link is not actually
pointing to a page or part of a page, it should be replaced with another semantic element, such
as a `button`, or the `<a>` tag should have a role of `button`. 

For example:

```html
<a href="/about">About us</a>
```

If the link contains _nothing but an image_, that image should specify alternative text, e.g.

```html
<a href="/apple">
    <img src="apple.png" alt="Apple">
</a>
```

Before HTML5, an anchor was often used to create a target to link to, e.g.

```html
<a name="example"></a>
```

This is not supported in HTML5, and the use of anchors for targets is discouraged. Use an `id`
attribute on a non-anchor tag instead, e.g.

```html
<div id="example"> ... </div>
```

Empty links (e.g. `<a></a>`) are often incorrectly used for buttons or controls in a
JavaScript application. In these cases, you should usually define the link as having a more appropriate
role, e.g. as a button. To do this, use the `role` attribute (e.g `<a role="button">`), or replace 
the `<a>` tag with a more appropriate tag, such as `<button>`.

For more details, see [Technique H91](https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20161007/H91)
and learn about [ARIA roles](https://www.sitepoint.com/how-to-use-aria-effectively-with-html5/).

bad-anchor

All `id` attributes on a page must be unique, or accessible technologies used by the page 
can stop working.

## Example

The duplicate `id` here makes it unclear which label belongs to which input field:

```html
<label for="name">Your name</label>
<input id="name">

<label for="name">Company name</label>
<input id="name">
```

As a result, accessible technologies like screen readers can fail to read out the 
correct text, or may read out no text at all.

Similar issues can occur when using `aria-labelledby` and `aria-describedby`.

## How to fix

Ensure all `id` attributes on a page are unique. 

## More information

See [Technique H93](https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20161007/H93) 
for more information.

duplicate-id

All controls on the page - including links, buttons, and fields - should clearly 
indicate when they have been selected by the keyboard.

This is a stricter version of [WCAG 2.4.7](https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG21/Understanding/focus-visible.html),
which requires that the focus indicator is visible, but doesn't specify how clearly
it should be visible.

You can confirm this yourself by loading a webpage and using the Tab key to navigate 
through it. Anything you can select should clearly alter its appearance when selected. 
For example, a text field might change color, or have a distinctive border applied. 

## The requirements

The [official requirements](https://w3c.github.io/wcag/understanding/focus-appearance.html) are 
complicated. A simplified version is:

* Surround the control with a solid outline
* The outline must have at least 3:1 contrast with its background
* The outline must have at least 3:1 contrast with its surroundings, or be at least 2px thick

The actual requirements allow for more variation, but generally require that you 
calculate the perimeter and/or area of the focus area, which can be very difficult.

## How to fix

Links and form controls should use a focus selector which contrasts with their
unfocused state, as well as any surroundings of the focus state. 

In practice, the easiest way to accomplish this is to use a two-color focus, like so:

```css
/* ensure high-contrast mode still has an indicator */
outline: 2px transparent solid;

/* Apply a thick yellow box-shadow with 
   a thin dark blue indicator in the middle */
box-shadow: 0 0 0 2px #F9F9D1, 0 0 0 4px #396196, 0 0 4px 8px #F9F9D1;
``` 

From [Technique C40](https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Techniques/css/C40).

Using two contrasting colors guarantees that the focus state will be visible, 
regardless of the background or surrounding colors.

## Troubleshooting

### Not enough contrasting pixels change

The [Success Criterion](https://w3c.github.io/wcag/understanding/focus-appearance.html) specifies a minimum area 
for the contrasting portion of the focus indicator, which is equivalent to a 2 CSS pixel border around the component.

From the requirements:

> "The easiest and most common way to meet this requirement is to use a solid outline around the component. 
> The outline must be at least 2px thick."

In practice, many websites use alternatives to this, such as a thick border along one edge. A problem with 
that approach is it is often dependent upon the length of that one edge, which for text links can vary dynamically.

See [Sara Soueidan](https://www.sarasoueidan.com/blog/focus-indicators/#2.-minimum-contrasting-area) for a good
write-up of this concept.

To comply with this Success Criterion, we recommend adding a 2px border around all edges.

Note an earlier draft of this Success Criterion has a more generous allowance here, which is not the case for the
final version.

### Elements appear to change in the browser

Focus states should be defined in CSS alone, and not require JavaScript to work. 

Try disabling JavaScript on the page, and see if focus is still visible. If it not, 
then the focus state won't work with assistive technologies that don't have a physical
keyboard, e.g. mobile phones.

Some more unusual means of implementing a focus state cannot be detected or measured
automatically. These include:

* Focus implemented via pseudo-elements - such as `::after` or `::before`. 
* Focus using `:focus-within` (JavaScript current provides no way to access these).
* Focus cascaded to child elements, e.g. a `<span>` inside an `<a>` tag. We detect
  some of these cases, but there are variations that we cannot detect.

Currently, there is no practical way to assess these focus states automatically.

### Elements over images not analyzed

Silktide cannot assess the contrast of elements that are over images. This is because
the contrast of an element is calculated by comparing the color of the element with the
color of the background. 

If the element is over an image, the background color is the
color of the image, which varies from pixel-to-pixel, and may vary further as the page
is resized, due to responsive design.

### Unexpected elements are focusable

You may be surprised to see tags like `<div>` or `<span>` being shown as focusable.
If an element has a `tabindex` of 0 or higher, it becomes focusable. Any HTML tag can be made 
focusable in this way, this is so that custom controls (e.g. your own drop-down menus, or 
sliders) can support keyboard navigation. [Learn more about tabindex on MDN](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Global_attributes/tabindex).

## Further reading

* [WCAG 2.4.13](https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Understanding/focus-appearance.html)
* [Minimum Contrasting Area explained (Sara Soueidan)](https://www.sarasoueidan.com/blog/focus-indicators/#2.-minimum-contrasting-area)

ensure-focus-appearance

All interactive components on a page, such as buttons or menus, should be far enough apart 
from other interactive areas, to avoid them being used by mistake. 

This ensures people with motor impairments can easily click or tap on the right element.

## How to fix

* Ensure all interactive elements are at least 24 CSS pixels wide and tall
* OR ensure there is at least 24 CSS pixels (minus the width and height of the element)
  between each interactive element

## Methodology

This check is run on both the mobile and desktop versions of every page. Results
for each may differ.

1. All interactive elements are identified, including buttons, links, and form controls.
2. If an element is not normally visible, it is ignored. This includes elements which
   are positioned offscreen or cropped (e.g. for 'screen-reader only' text).
3. If an element is larger than 24 CSS pixels in both dimensions, it passes.
4. Otherwise, the element is compared to all other elements on the page.
5. The minimum horizontal gap between the element is calculated as 24 CSS pixels,  
   minus the width of the element.
6. The minimum vertical gap between the element is calculated as 24 CSS pixels,  
   minus the height of the element.
7. If another element falls within the minimum horizontal or vertical gap, the 
   element fails, unless both are links that point to the same place.

## Further reading

* [Target Size (Minimum)](https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Understanding/target-size-minimum.html)
* [Technique C42 - Using min-height and min-width to ensure sufficient target spacing](https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Techniques/css/C42)

ensure-minimum-target-size

Most content should be written so people with a lower secondary level of education can understand it.
Where this is not possible, supplemental content or an alternative version should be provided.

This check highlights pages with a reading age of 16 years or higher. Only pages with at least 100 words
of content (excluding navigation, footers, etc) are considered.  

For more information, see [WCAG SC 3.1.5](https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/meaning-supplements.html).

ensure-reading-ability-is-not-advanced

All interactive components on a page, such as buttons or fields, should ideally be large enough 
to be easily used by people with motor impairments. 

This ensures people with motor impairments can easily click or tap on the element.

The recommended size is 44 x 44 CSS pixels, with some exceptions:

* **Equivalent available** - the functionality provided by
  the control is available elsewhere, and large enough, on the same page.
* **Inline text** - the control appears inside a sentence or block of text. 
* **User Agent control** - the size of the target is determined by the user agent 
  and is not modified by the author. Generally this is not the case for web content.
* **Essential** - the size of the target is essential to the information being conveyed,
  e.g. a tutorial demonstrating what a small button looks like. This exception is rare.

## Applying this check

Nearly all websites will fail this check by default. The minimum size requirement
is larger than most links and controls on most websites.

This is the much stricter version of the WCAG 2.2 AA check for target size. Most websites
should focus on the AA check before considering this AAA check:

* [Target Size (Minimum)](https://w3c.github.io/wcag/understanding/target-size-minimum.html)

## Methodology

This check is run on both the mobile and desktop versions of every page. Results
for each may differ.

1. All interactive elements are identified, including buttons, links, and form controls. 
2. If an element is preceded or followed directly by a non-empty text node, the control
   is ignored.
3. If an element is not normally visible, it is ignored. This includes elements which 
   are positioned offscreen or cropped (e.g. for 'screen-reader only' text).
4. If an element is a link, and another visible link on the page points to the same URL, with 
   that other link meeting the size requirements, the element is ignored.
5. Otherwise, the element must have a minimum size of 44 x 44 CSS pixels.

## Troubleshooting

Silktide only records the first 100 instances of a failure on a page. Because failures
of this check are common, it is possible that your page has more than 100 failures, but
only the first 100 will be shown.

## Further reading

* [Target Size (Enhanced)](https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Understanding/target-size-enhanced)

ensure-reasonable-target-size

When an image is the only content of a link, it should specify alternative text, 
via an `alt` attribute. The alternative text should describe the purpose of the link.

Without this, some users will be unable to determine what a link does, for example anyone 
using a screen reader.

To fix this, simply add an `alt` attribute to the image inside the link, e.g.:

```html
<a href="/apple">
    <img src="apple.png" alt="A red apple">
</a>
```

img-in-link-missing-alt

wcag-22.score

wcag-22-a.score

wcag-22-aa.score

wcag-22-aaa.score

website.pages

website.documents

Forms should always contain a submit button, otherwise some people using
accessible technologies may not be able to submit the form.

Submit buttons are `<input>` elements with a type attribute of `submit` or
`image`, or `<button>` elements with type `submit`.

## Rationale 

Many users expect to be able to press enter in a form to submit it. However,
this is not always possible.

Users of some assistive technologies may (depending on the technology) only
be able to press a button to submit the form. In the absence of a submit
button, the user may not be able to submit the form.

In addition, the absence of a submit button suggests that the form may 
provide an automatic 'change of context', i.e. major change to the user 
interface without the user choosing to do so. This can be highly disorientating
to some users.

## Methodology

* All `<form>` elements on the page are tested separately.
* Check whether the <form> contains any of the following elements, and that the elements are visible
  when the page first loads:
  * `<input>`
  * `<textarea>`
  * `<checkbox>`
  * `<select>`
  * `<button>`
* If the form contains any of the above elements, then it is considered to
  need a submit button. If a submit button is missing, then a failure is reported.

### Field visibility check

The check for field visibility (above) is designed to ignore forms which perform functions not normally
associated with user interaction, such as tracking code, or ASPX forms which wrap every page 
but which don't contain any interactive elements. These are common potential false positives.

A trade-off here is that some forms may be invisible when a page loads, and later revealed to
a user following some interaction. If these are missing a submit button, Silktide will not detect them.
In practice, this false negative is far less likely than the false positive this prevents. 

## Further reading

* [WCAG 3.2.2 - On Input](https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Understanding/on-input.html)
* [Technique H32](https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG20-TECHS/H32.html)

form-submit-required

Links must be appear visually distinct from regular text. A common mistake is to make links
only differ subtly in color. Users with visual impairments cannot see these links.   

There are two ways to comply with this requirement:

1. You can make links appear differently from regular text without relying on color alone.
   For example, you can add an underline to your links. This makes links easy to identify, even
   to people who cannot see color at all.
2. You can make links a color which is very different from the surrounding text (a 3:1 ratio), 
   AND ensure that when the link is selected with the keyboard or mouse that it appears   
   differently from regular text without relying on color alone.

Unless you have disabled the `outline` CSS style, links will automatically appear visually distinct
when selected with the keyboard.

link-contrast

The purpose of a link should be clear from the text inside the link. Links like "learn more" are
not helpful to users with assistive technology.

Links should also avoid redundantly saying that they are links, e.g. "link to page" as screen
readers will read these out with the word "link" added, e.g. "link link to page".

Exceptions to these rules are allowed where the purpose of a link would be ambiguous to users 
in general.

link-purpose-a

Do not link to an anchor on the page that does not exist. For example:
linking to `#content` without a valid destination such as `<body id="content"></body>`.

A common web design pattern is to use a named anchor to show an element via JavaScript, e.g.

```html
<a href="#foo" onclick="$('.bar').toggle();">Click me</a>
<div class="bar">
    This is some content.
</div>
``` 

In these cases, the anchor (`#foo`) should point to the `id` of the hidden element:

```html
<a href="#foo" onclick="$('#foo').toggle();">Click me</a>
<div id="foo">
    This is some content.
</div>
```

This way the semantic intent of the link is preserved, even without JavaScript. 
Note that doing so may require modification to your script, to prevent automatic 
scrolling to the named anchor.

linking-to-anchor-on-page-that-does-not-exist

When using accessible descriptions (`aria-describedby`), ensure that the 
descriptions exist.

## Explanation

ARIA descriptions are commonly used to add supplementary information to 
elements in a page, especially form controls. For example:

```html
<input type="email" aria-describedby="email-help">
<p id="email-helpp">Enter your work email address</p>
```

In this example, the `aria-describedby` for the field points to an ID of `email-help`,
which doesn't exist. The paragraph it refers to instead has an ID of `email-helpp`, presumably 
a typo.

## Why this matters

It isn't usually clear when an accessible description is broken, even during user testing.

This check helps to identify where an element clearly intended to have a description, but
that description is missing.

When a description is broken, key information about that element may be omitted from 
assistive technologies.

missing-aria-described-by

When selecting a user interface component with the keyboard, the focus indicator must 
not be _partly_ obscured by anything in front of it. 

## Why this matters

When using a keyboard, it is important that the user can see where they are on the page.
If the focus indicator is obscured, the user may not know where they are, and may not
be able to interact with the page.

## Examples

Most common examples include:

* Banners at the top or bottom of the page, such as cookie banners
* Fixed navigation bars
* Fixed footers
* Popup modals, such as cookie consent modals

## Testing this manually

* Open the page
* Press the tab key to move focus through elements on the page
* Check that the focus indicator is not fully obscured by anything in front of it

## Comparison with Level AA version

This is the stricter (Level AAA) version of the Level AA check (2.4.11).

The Level AA version only flags issues where the focus indicator is _completely_ obscured, this
version flags issues where the focus indicator is _partly_ obscured.

## How to fix

With elements that cover part of the screen, such as cookie banners, ensure
that the user can scroll to see any content behind the banner, without having to close
the banner.

The two most very common solutions are:

1. Avoid the use of fixed elements that could obscure other elements
2. Use the CSS `scroll-margin` property (see [WCAG Technique C43](https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Techniques/css/C43))

With popup modals, it should usually be impossible to focus anything behind the modal.
Most common modal frameworks will automatically trap focus within the modal, so that
this is impossible. Example: [Bootstrap Modal](https://getbootstrap.com/docs/5.2/components/modal/#live-demo).

## Methodology

1. Silktide simulates a keyboard user tabbing through the page
2. Silktide simulates the focused element being vertically scrolled into the center of the page
   (see 'Rationale for scrolling' below)
3. For each element that receives focus, Silktide checks that the focus indicator is not obscured
   by another element on top of it
4. If the focus indicator is obscured, Silktide raises an issue

### Rationale for scrolling

The rationale for point #2 (above) is worth expanding. At different screen sizes, the amount of scrolling
a browser makes between tabs will vary. For example, Chrome will typically avoid scrolling until a
focus element falls outside the current viewport, and then it will adopt the least amount of
scrolling possible to bring the element into view.

This means if you test a page in Silktide, and in a browser with a fractionally different height,
you may experience different elements being obscured or not, especially elements blocked by sticky headers
and footers. Every only a few pixels of difference in screen height can make a huge difference the
further down the page you go.

In all these cases, the use of user-directed vertical scrolling, e.g. via the cursor keys, would permit
the focused element to be seen. Whether that would be necessary would depend on the exact browser and
size of the browser viewport.

Silktide purposely adopts a generous frame here, to avoid flagging issues which might only affect the
exact screen size that it tested. In our testing, when we didn't do this, the number of subjectively false
positives could be very high, and extremely confusing, as they would not replicate during manual testing on
anything but the exact same browser size.

Essentially, Silktide chooses not to flag issues which _could_ affect some very particular screen sizes
_inconsistently_, but it will flag issues that should affect _all_ screen sizes consistently.

The W3C does not specify how to test this Success Criterion.

### Simulating conditional modals

Silktide adopts additional behavior to simulate the use of dialog modals that may be opened by user
behavior after a page loads (i.e. modals that don't automatically open when a page loads).

If a non-opened modal is detected, Silktide assumes that _elements outside the modal cannot be focused_.
This is not guaranteed, but it is impossible for Silktide to predict the behavior of a modal that has not
yet been opened, and this is much more accurate than assuming that the modal does not constrain focus.

As a result, a modal which is incorrectly programmed (i.e. doesn't constrain focus) may not be detected
as obscuring focus behind it, if the modal is not opened by default.

## Further reading

* [WCAG 2.4.12](https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Understanding/focus-not-obscured-enhanced)
* [WCAG Technique C43 - Using CSS margin and scroll-margin to un-obscure content](https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Techniques/css/C43)

ensure-focus-is-not-obscured-enhanced

To comply with the strictest accessibility standard (WCAG AAA), the colour of text must 
strongly contrast with its background color, so that people with significant visual impairments 
can read it.

The [contrast ratio](https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/visual-audio-contrast-contrast.html#contrast-ratiodef)
must be at least 7:1 for body text, and 4.5:1 for large text.

A far less demanding version of this check (1.4.3) exists for WCAG AA. All websites should aim to 
meet the easier AA standard at a minimum. The AAA standard is desirable but far more challenging,
and may not be practical for your website.

aaa-text-contrast

To comply with WCAG AA, the colour of text must sufficiently contrast with
its background color, so that people with moderate visual impairments can read it.

The [contrast ratio](https://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/visual-audio-contrast-contrast.html#contrast-ratiodef) 
must be at least 4.5:1 for body text, and 3:1 for large text.

A much more demanding version of this check (1.4.6) exists for WCAG AAA. Ignoring an issue in this check 
will also ignore it in that check, and vice versa.

aa-text-contrast

Lists of related items should be written [semantically](https://html.com/semantic-markup/) as a 
list.

Usually this means rewriting these to use the `<ul>` or `<ol>` tags.

This allows assistive technologies to more easily navigate from item to
item, or past entire groups of links if the user wants to. 

## Examples 

### Navigation

This navigation:

```html
<a href="/about">About us</a>
<a href="/products">Products</a>
<a href="/contact">Contact us</a>
```

Should be rewritten as a list:

```html
<ul>
  <li><a href="/about">About us</a></li>
  <li><a href="/products">Products</a></li>
  <li><a href="/contact">Contact us</a></li>
</ul>
```

### Tables for content

This single-column table is redundant. There is no
value in placing the content in a table, which makes
it harder for screen reader users to interpret and interact
with.

```html
<table>
  <tr>
    <td>
      Banana
    </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td>
      Apple
    </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td>
      Pear
    </td>
  </tr>
</table>
```

Should be rewritten as a list:

```html
<ul>
  <li>Banana</li>
  <li>Apple</li>
  <li>Pear</li>
</ul>
```

## Justification

Users of assistive technologies, like screen readers, can skip an entire
list in one step. In some cases, they can even search inside a list. 

These aids are not available where links are written outside a list. 
Failing to use lists correctly can force users to have to step through
hundreds of items one at a time.

## Methodology

1. Any single-column tables are automatically considered 
   redundant lists. 
2. For non-table elements, recursively work down the page looking inside
   each element for links separated by minimal amounts of non-link text. 
   If the non-link text is below 30 characters 
   in length, we assume we're inside content that should be a list.
   Some exceptions are made, e.g. the presence of an `<hr>` would break
   out of the list.

## More information

See [Technique
H48](https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20161007/H48) for
details.

mark-navigation-section-as-list

When selecting a user interface component with the keyboard, the focus indicator must 
not be _completely obscured_ by anything in front of it.

## Why this matters

When using a keyboard, it is important that the user can see where they are on the page.
If the focus indicator is obscured, the user may not know where they are, and may not
be able to interact with the page.

## Examples

Most common examples include:

* Banners at the top or bottom of the page, such as cookie banners
* Fixed navigation bars
* Fixed footers
* Popup modals, such as cookie consent modals

## Testing this manually

* Open the page
* Press the tab key to move focus through elements on the page
* Check that the focus indicator is not fully obscured by anything in front of it

## Comparison with Level AAA version

This is the less strict (Level AA) version of the Level AAA check (2.4.12).

This Level AA version only flags issues where the focus indicator is _completely_ obscured, the
Level AAA version flags issues where the focus indicator is _partly_ obscured.

## How to fix

With elements that cover part of the screen, such as cookie banners, ensure
that the user can scroll to see any content behind the banner, without having to close
the banner.

The two most very common solutions are:

1. Avoid the use of fixed elements that could obscure other elements
2. Use the CSS `scroll-margin` property (see [WCAG Technique C43](https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Techniques/css/C43)) 

With popup modals, it should usually be impossible to focus anything behind the modal.
Most common modal frameworks will automatically trap focus within the modal, so that
this is impossible. Example: [Bootstrap Modal](https://getbootstrap.com/docs/5.2/components/modal/#live-demo).

## Methodology

1. Silktide simulates a keyboard user tabbing through the page
2. Silktide simulates the focused element being vertically scrolled into the center of the page
   (see 'Rationale for scrolling' below)
3. For each element that receives focus, Silktide checks that the focus indicator is not obscured
   by another element on top of it
4. If the focus indicator is obscured, Silktide raises an issue

### Rationale for scrolling

The rationale for point #2 (above) is worth expanding. At different screen sizes, the amount of scrolling 
a browser makes between tabs will vary. For example, Chrome will typically avoid scrolling until a
focus element falls outside the current viewport, and then it will adopt the least amount of 
scrolling possible to bring the element into view.

This means if you test a page in Silktide, and in a browser with a fractionally different height, 
you may experience different elements being obscured or not, especially elements blocked by sticky headers 
and footers. Every only a few pixels of difference in screen height can make a huge difference the 
further down the page you go.

In all these cases, the use of user-directed vertical scrolling, e.g. via the cursor keys, would permit 
the focused element to be seen. Whether that would be necessary would depend on the exact browser and
size of the browser viewport.

Silktide purposely adopts a generous frame here, to avoid flagging issues which might only affect the 
exact screen size that it tested. In our testing, when we didn't do this, the number of subjectively false
positives could be very high, and extremely confusing, as they would not replicate during manual testing on
anything but the exact same browser size.

Essentially, Silktide chooses not to flag issues which _could_ affect some very particular screen sizes 
_inconsistently_, but it will flag issues that should affect _all_ screen sizes consistently.

The W3C does not specify how to test this Success Criterion.

### Simulating conditional modals

Silktide adopts additional behavior to simulate the use of dialog modals that may be opened by user
behavior after a page loads (i.e. modals that don't automatically open when a page loads).

If a non-opened modal is detected, Silktide assumes that _elements outside the modal cannot be focused_.
This is not guaranteed, but it is impossible for Silktide to predict the behavior of a modal that has not
yet been opened, and this is much more accurate than assuming that the modal does not constrain focus.

As a result, a modal which is incorrectly programmed (i.e. doesn't constrain focus) may not be detected 
as obscuring focus behind it, if the modal is not opened by default.

## Further reading

* [WCAG 2.4.11](https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Understanding/focus-not-obscured-minimum)
* [WCAG Technique C43 - Using CSS margin and scroll-margin to un-obscure content](https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Techniques/css/C43)

ensure-focus-is-not-obscured-minimum

To comply with WCAG 2.1, fields must identify what their purpose is _programmatically_. If done correctly,
this allows browsers to help users fill in forms with known information, such as their name and email address.

This is accomplished via the `autocomplete` attribute, which should be set to a 
[supported value](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Attributes/autocomplete) wherever
appropriate, e.g. 

```html
<label for="name">
  First Name
</label>
<input id="name" type="text" autocomplete="given-name">
```

For fields where `autocomplete` is not appropriate, e.g. due to security, or the field not matching the
specification, the specific field should be ignored.

## Methodology

* All fields which could support `autocomplete` (e.g. text fields)
  are checked. Other fields - like dropdown menus - are ignored.
* The [accessible name](https://www.w3.org/TR/accname-1.2/) of each field is considered. In most cases this
  will be the `<label>` for the field.
* If the name matches a known pattern the field 
  must have an appropriate `autocomplete` value specified.
  For example, an `<input>` with type `text` with a label of 
  "First Name" would be expected to have an autocomplete value 
  of `given-name` or similar.

Note that using `autocomplete="on"` is not sufficient to pass this check, a
specific named autocomplete value must be used. See the
[supported values](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTML/Attributes/autocomplete).

## Troubleshooting

If a field is a false positive, check whether the field has an 
appropriate accessible name (i.e. a `<label>` or `aria-label`).

If the label is incorrect, Silktide may assume that the field 
requires `autocomplete` where it does not. You should fix the 
label to avoid this.

Otherwise, you can simply ignore the specific field.

## More information

* [How to use HTML 5.2 attributes](https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG21/Techniques/html/H98)

Priority	Recommendation	Progress
	Ensure controls clearly indicate when they are selected WCAG 2.2 AAA 2.4.13	0.4%
	Ensure content is not too difficult to understand WCAG 2.0 AAA 3.1.5	78%
	Ensure interactive components are far enough apart WCAG 2.2 AA 2.5.8	99%
	Specify alternative text for images inside links WCAG 2.0 A 1.1.1	97.1%
	Avoid using the same link text for different destinations WCAG 2.0 A 2.4.4	95.6%

NHS Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly ICB

Accessibility

WCAG Levels

Recommendations

The best free accessibility checker