- 🇺🇸United States aaronpinero
I wonder if it would be useful to follow this accessibility guidance:
https://a11y-guidelines.orange.com/en/articles/technical-iframe/I would consider the google tag manager iframe to be a technical iframe (as opposed to an iframe that is providing content to the user. For accessibility compliance and for hiding the iframe from the accessibility API, it is recommended that:
- the iframe has a title that identifies it as a technical element rather than a content element
- it has the attribute aria-hidden="true"
- it has tabindex="-1" - last update
over 1 year ago 1 pass - 🇺🇸United States aaronpinero
Uploading new patch with previously mentioned accessibility recommendations.
- last update
about 1 year ago 54 pass - 🇪🇸Spain cbccharlie
Although the issue is from version 8.x, I also upload a patch for version 2.0.2.
- 🇪🇸Spain cbccharlie
Although the issue is from version 8.x, I also upload a patch for version 7.x-2.x.
- last update
9 months ago Patch Failed to Apply - last update
9 months ago 1 pass - 🇩🇪Germany Anybody Porta Westfalica
@aaronpinero please instead incorporate your changes from #10 into the MR.
Patches should not be used anymore.
- First commit to issue fork.
- Status changed to Closed: works as designed
25 days ago 12:38am 27 November 2024 - 🇺🇸United States luke.leber Pennsylvania
Reviewing MR !25, none of this appears to be needed.
This iframe is marked
display:nonewhich effectively removes the DOM element from the accessibility tree.The issue appears to be the result of naive accessibility scans and not the result of actual manual testing.
I recommend closing this issue, citing the display property on the iframe. If anything, I'd recommend removing the visibility CSS property as it's a no-op when paired with display none.
Marking as works as designed. If anyone has a11y citations suggesting otherwise, feel free to re-open, but all signs point to a buggy accessibility scanner as the cause here.