Skip to content

Update G211 prose and wrong working example #4555

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Open
wants to merge 9 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Update G211 prose and wrong working example #4555

wants to merge 9 commits into from

Conversation

patrickhlauke
Copy link
Member

@patrickhlauke patrickhlauke commented Aug 17, 2025 •
edited
Loading

  • correct the figure numbering
  • remove the inline working example for simplified accessible name
  • reuse the existing (but unlinked) example3.html to provide the actual working example for simplified accessible name
  • clean up how code blocks are marked up/indented

Closes #4554

Previews:

@patrickhlauke
Update G211 prose and wrong working example
b283fc2 
* correct the figure numbering
* remove the inline working example
* reuse the existing (but unlinked) `example3.html` to provide the actual working example for simplified accName

Closes #4554
@patrickhlauke patrickhlauke mentioned this pull request Aug 17, 2025
Open
@netlify Netlify
Copy link

netlify bot commented Aug 17, 2025 •
edited
Loading

✅ Deploy Preview for wcag2 ready!

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit 03d0b93
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/projects/wcag2/deploys/68b1be87aa1b470008108d0c
😎 Deploy Preview https://deploy-preview-4555--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 project configuration.

@patrickhlauke patrickhlauke force-pushed the patrickhlauke-issue4554 branch from f6f3643 to f62eaaa Compare August 17, 2025 14:47
mxdvl
mxdvl reviewed Aug 21, 2025
View reviewed changes
patrickhlauke
patrickhlauke commented Aug 21, 2025
View reviewed changes
@patrickhlauke patrickhlauke self-assigned this Aug 22, 2025
@alastc alastc requested a review from fstrr August 22, 2025 15:49
fstrr
fstrr approved these changes Aug 22, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@fstrr fstrr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

this is good. you could, if you wanted to, add autocomplete attributes to relevant inputs.

@patrickhlauke
Copy link
Member Author

this is good. you could, if you wanted to, add autocomplete attributes to relevant inputs.

done, good idea

@patrickhlauke patrickhlauke force-pushed the patrickhlauke-issue4554 branch from 51a61c4 to 87801ef Compare August 23, 2025 10:52
@patrickhlauke patrickhlauke force-pushed the patrickhlauke-issue4554 branch from 87801ef to 109185c Compare August 23, 2025 10:57
@patrickhlauke patrickhlauke mentioned this pull request Aug 25, 2025
Closed
bruce-usab
bruce-usab approved these changes Aug 29, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@bruce-usab bruce-usab left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

A significant improvement, thanks!
Text sizes in the examples seem uneven to me but (1) we have that defect elsewhere, (2) don't hold up publishing of this since it‘s an unambiguous improvement, and (3) addressing could/should be a new issue.

@mbgower
Copy link
Contributor

mbgower commented Aug 29, 2025

A significant improvement, thanks! Text sizes in the examples seem uneven to me but (1) we have that defect elsewhere, (2) don't hold up publishing of this since it‘s an unambiguous improvement, and (3) addressing could/should be a new issue.

@bruce-usab do you want to open a separate issue for that?

@patrickhlauke
Copy link
Member Author

generally, it would be nice to have a nice unified set of styles for ALL working examples. happy to try and come up with something @bruce-usab

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@fstrr fstrr fstrr approved these changes

@bruce-usab bruce-usab bruce-usab approved these changes

+1 more reviewer

@mxdvl mxdvl mxdvl left review comments

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements
Assignees

@patrickhlauke patrickhlauke

Labels
Substantive Techniques
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

G211: Example 8 gets wrong code example
5 participants
@patrickhlauke @mbgower @mxdvl @fstrr @bruce-usab