You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
We have a nested option for the checkboxes component, which looks like this:
The Design System component on which this component is based doesn't have this option - we added it as a custom option a few years ago. There are some possible accessibility concerns:
no hierarchy present for screen reader users to understand that nested checkboxes belong to a parent (was previously in a list, but we've updated the markup to match the DS component, which uses DIV elements instead of lists)
no indication for screen reader users that changing nested checkboxes can select/deselect parent checkboxes (is this a problem?)
It's not currently clear how widely used the nested option is. One usage is when choosing 'Get emails' on some finders, which often shows something like this:
This could potentially be a non-nested list with an 'all' option appended.
Other uses to investigate:
collections-publisher (1)
content-publisher (1)
datagovuk_find (1)
finder-frontend (2)
release (1)
signon (7)
smart-answers (1)
travel-advice-publisher (3)
whitehall (21)
If we weren't using the nested option we could remove it and save ourselves a chunk of JavaScript and the general maintenance overhead, but further investigation is needed.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
We have a nested option for the checkboxes component, which looks like this:
The Design System component on which this component is based doesn't have this option - we added it as a custom option a few years ago. There are some possible accessibility concerns:
It's not currently clear how widely used the nested option is. One usage is when choosing 'Get emails' on some finders, which often shows something like this:
This could potentially be a non-nested list with an 'all' option appended.
Other uses to investigate:
If we weren't using the nested option we could remove it and save ourselves a chunk of JavaScript and the general maintenance overhead, but further investigation is needed.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: