search

alphagov / govuk-design-system-backlog

GOV.UK Design System Community Backlog
31 stars 2 forks source link

Checkboxes #37

Open govuk-design-system opened 6 years ago

govuk-design-system commented 6 years ago

Use this issue to discuss this component in the GOV.UK Design System.

torydunn-hmrc commented 5 years ago

Would it be possible to look at vertical alignment when the option text is longer than a single line? Should alignment be top aligned, in general - would that help?

36degrees commented 5 years ago

Hey @torydunn-hmrc – I just want to check what you're asking for. When you say 'would it be possible to look at' do you think there's an issue with the checkbox component that needs looking at, or do you just want to see an example so you know what it does?

We don't currently have any examples of checkboxes with very long option text in the Design System, because we'd generally encourage service teams to keep their option text short. But I can show you what it looks like if you do have a lot of text…

screenshot 2018-10-11 at 12 04 59bst

As you can see, the first line of the option text is vertically aligned with the middle of the checkbox, and then any further lines just wrap underneath it.

Does that help?

torydunn-hmrc commented 5 years ago

Hi Oliver

Thanks for the examples.

Yes that's what I mean. We certainly try to avoid long text and options, but there can be some complicated distinctions in tax options that make things wrap. Looking at the design system again: even with 2 lines, it looks unaligned vertically. And when some of our tax options reach 3 lines (the max I have seen), it gets pretty weird.

Could you see what it's like with at top aligning, even when it's a single line? Because I imagine trying to do vertical centring of multiple lines would be a real nightmare!

[image: Screen Shot 2018-10-11 at 13.11.28.png]

Cheers Tory

On Thu, 11 Oct 2018 at 12:16, Oliver Byford notifications@github.com wrote:

Hey @torydunn-hmrc https://github.com/torydunn-hmrc – I just want to check what you're asking for. When you say 'would it be possible to look at' do you think there's an issue with the checkbox component that needs looking at, or do you just want to see an example so you know what it does?

We don't currently have any examples of checkboxes with very long option text in the Design System, because we'd generally encourage service teams to keep their option text short. But I can show you what it looks like if you do have a lot of text…

[image: screenshot 2018-10-11 at 12 04 59bst] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/121939/46800310-2f088c80-cd4f-11e8-8c5c-76bd91b4eeb9.png

As you can see, the first line of the option text is vertically aligned with the middle of the checkbox, and then any further lines just wrap underneath it.

Does that help?

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/alphagov/govuk-design-system-backlog/issues/37#issuecomment-428917001, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AildwgLXP_mxrf0CQDuqWXAS-HcnNGu9ks5ujyiIgaJpZM4RcUPt .

-- Tory Dunn

dashouse commented 5 years ago

Hi Tory,

I think many people have tried (and failed) to dynamically vertically centre the text next to a checkbox or radio button, however when we put these components together we didn't find any examples where the first line wasn't vertically aligned to the middle of the checkbox, with the content wrapping below that.

In our case this looks slightly more dramatic as our radios and checkboxes are certainly larger than most. Here's a few examples from other design systems.

screen shot 2018-10-11 at 13 55 35 screen shot 2018-10-11 at 13 56 24 screen shot 2018-10-11 at 13 58 58 screen shot 2018-10-11 at 13 59 30

The main factor here though is that we simply don't know if the content is going to wrap or not, something that doesn't wrap on a large screen may well wrap on a small one. We can't set up any rules for these to behave differently at different breakpoints because it's entirely dependent on the character length of the label not the screen size.

Here's an example of something that doesn't wrap on desktop, but starts to wrap at a undefinable point.

checkbozx-wrap

Aligning the label to the top of the checkbox would fix this as you say, however with our radios and checkboxes being larger than normal, I think you'll agree it makes them look a little odd when the labels are short and don't wrap.

screen shot 2018-10-11 at 14 26 11

I think it would be acceptable to adjust this spacing manually for individual use cases with known content but from a Design System perspective, when designing for the unknown there's not a huge amount we can do to change the spacing based on content length of each label.

MartinDM commented 5 years ago

Not wishing to divert the existing topic of alignment on labels for checkboxes, I wanted also to propose a 'Select all' option for checkboxes.

Would it be useful to include such a check-all option? We found a need for something similar at DVSA and added it to our prototype, but perhaps others have needed this also?

Of course it'd be JS-driven, but the first option to 'select all' could be removed if JS is disabled, so it's an enhancement...

Eg. [] Select all [] Option 1 [] Option 2 [] Option 3

The first option would also track the state of the other options, so if you checked everything, it'd automatically check itself...

Thoughts on the feasibility of this?

NickColley commented 5 years ago

Had a go prototyping this:

https://select-all-govuk-frontend-prototype.glitch.me/

We could take advantage of the indeterminate property:

Quick observations:

Edit: Just realised my example is a bit broken, will make it work properly when I get a second...

torydunn-hmrc commented 5 years ago

Thanks for the examples and experiments, Dave. I think it we can find a way to adjust them manually, when the majority of options start to wrap, it will help.

On Thu, 11 Oct 2018 at 14:37, Dave House notifications@github.com wrote:

Hi Tory,

I think many people have tried (and failed) to dynamically vertically centre the text next to a checkbox or radio button, however when we put these components together we didn't find any examples where the first line wasn't vertically aligned to the middle of the checkbox, with the content wrapping below that.

In our case this looks slightly more dramatic as our radios and checkboxes are certainly larger than most. Here's a few examples from other design systems.

[image: screen shot 2018-10-11 at 13 55 35] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/23356842/46807015-efe33700-cd60-11e8-9770-52169b9e3c88.png

[image: screen shot 2018-10-11 at 13 56 24] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/23356842/46807033-fa9dcc00-cd60-11e8-8e8f-ddb522490ef6.png

[image: screen shot 2018-10-11 at 13 58 58] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/23356842/46807041-ff628000-cd60-11e8-8506-940c3e2755b7.png

[image: screen shot 2018-10-11 at 13 59 30] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/23356842/46807053-038e9d80-cd61-11e8-8106-6506f647c1d0.png

The main factor here though is that we simply don't know if the content is going to wrap or not, something that doesn't wrap on a large screen may well wrap on a small one. We can't set up any rules for these to behave differently at different breakpoints because it's entirely dependent on the character length of the label not the screen size.

Here's an example of something that doesn't wrap on desktop, but starts to wrap at a undefinable point.

[image: checkbozx-wrap] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/23356842/46807275-7566e700-cd61-11e8-9c87-dc481bef1936.gif

Aligning the label to the top of the checkbox would fix this as you say, however with our radios and checkboxes being larger than normal, I think you'll agree it makes them look a little odd when the labels are short and don't wrap.

[image: screen shot 2018-10-11 at 14 26 11] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/23356842/46807381-afd08400-cd61-11e8-99b4-04d20f42aacc.png

I think it would be acceptable to adjust this spacing manually for individual use cases with known content but from a Design System perspective, when designing for the unknown there's not a huge amount we can do to change the spacing based on content length of each label.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/alphagov/govuk-design-system-backlog/issues/37#issuecomment-428958075, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/Aildwu63RcpaPHxzV3M6rHAQWlB6Ytt-ks5uj0mHgaJpZM4RcUPt .

-- Tory Dunn

Head of Design | CDIO Digital Services | Dorset House | 07392 289160

edwardhorsford commented 5 years ago

I'd like the design system to support dividers for checkboxes as it does for radios - it confused me when it didn't.

Like radios, checkboxes sometimes have options that are unlike others - such as 'none of the above' - in this case a divider helps communicate this.

Example:

screenshot 2019-01-23 at 16 47 46

Why

Similar reasoning to having it for radios - it helps communicate the options and that these are slightly different.

joelanman commented 5 years ago

Just a note that if we supported the 'None' of the above' pattern specifically, we might want to consider JavaScript to unselect the other checkboxes.

edwardhorsford commented 5 years ago

Just a note that if we supported the 'None' of the above' pattern specifically, we might want to consider JavaScript to unselect the other checkboxes.

Yep - and unselect 'none of the above' if you then pick one of the others ones.

stevenaproctor commented 5 years ago

You would also need to handle it when JavaScript is not available.

Do we want to use 'None of the above' in the example or something like 'My event will not include any of these'?

amyhupe commented 5 years ago

Dropbox Paper audit

On 5 Feb 2019 the Design System team reviewed a Dropbox Paper document discussing the Checkboxes component.

The aim was to reduce the number of places containing guidance and code by:

Below is a record of the outcomes of that review.

If you need to, you can see the original Dropbox Paper content in the internet archive.

Review outcomes

Updates to the Design System

The Design System team will carry out the following updates to ensure that relevant, useful content from the Dropbox Paper file is added to the Design System.

Add guidance explaining:

Research and examples

The following research findings and examples are from the archived Dropbox Paper file.

Carer’s Allowance

The Carer's Allowance tested a range of different styles for the active and hover states of radio buttons, none of which caused users to click the label instead of the control.

Only when they removed the controls did people start to click the labels:

image

They got rid of radios and checkboxes and replaced them with a kind of button. They tested very well and no-one hesitated to use them.

GOV.UK Verify

GOV.UK Verify tested some variations on this, and never got a level of confidence they were happy with. Some people paused when presented with a novel interface element. After interacting they were generally fine.

checkbox-gif

joelanman commented 5 years ago

Just to note that in the Verify gif above, the options all had a grey background that got lost in the gif capture, so they looked like normal buttons

torydunn-hmrc commented 5 years ago

I'm a bit late to reply... I can see how having the "or" for None of the above could be helpful, but it generally isn't necessary, and seems like it is creating more cognitive load. I've also noticed that the use of "or" within a series of radio buttons usually masks that the question should be broken into two.

aliaksandrkrasnou commented 5 years ago

Had a go prototyping this:

https://select-all-govuk-frontend-prototype.glitch.me/

We could take advantage of the indeterminate property:

Quick observations:

  • this is a JavaScript only behaviour, so we'd have to be OK with this.
  • does it make sense for a user using assistive technologies?
  • does the indeterminate option include semantics that are announced to assistive technologies?

Edit: Just realised my example is a bit broken, will make it work properly when I get a second...

Hi @nickcolley , do you have any thoughts if this feature is included into the next releases of govuk-frontend or not?

MartinDM commented 5 years ago

Just to show one approach, we've used a 'Select all' pattern in MTS (our version doesn't use indeterminate) https://dvsa-front-end.herokuapp.com/library/mts/select-all . JS code: https://github.com/dvsa/front-end/blob/master/src/assets/js/dvsa-mts/modules/check-all/check-all.js .

Nick's refs on Indeterminate are helpful; and looking at the MDN docs it's defined as 'a state in which it's impossible to say whether the item is toggled on or off'.

In the case of a Select All, I don't think this applies. If we're talking only about a 'Select all' component as in the prototype and the Design System link ^, I'd suggest indeterminate is not appropriate to use here; the parent checkbox is always 'known'.

Perhaps if used on a different component where a selected option might reveal further options, it could be useful, but I think it'd serve to confuse if used on your standard 'Select all' where a simple on/off is better suited?

Are we at a point where the code for this solution is useful and I could include in a PR to the govuk-front-end?

jonathaninch commented 5 years ago

I can't get hint text to appear when using the Nunjuck code snippet? HTML version works. Tried it on Chrome and Edge.

36degrees commented 5 years ago

I can't get hint text to appear when using the Nunjuck code snippet? HTML version works. Tried it on Chrome and Edge.

Hey Jonathan,

Do you have an example of the nunjucks code that you're using? Can you also confirm what version of GOV.UK Frontend and/or GOV.UK Prototype Kit you're using?

Thanks

jonathaninch commented 5 years ago

I can't get hint text to appear when using the Nunjuck code snippet? HTML version works. Tried it on Chrome and Edge.

Hey Jonathan,

Do you have an example of the nunjucks code that you're using? Can you also confirm what version of GOV.UK Frontend and/or GOV.UK Prototype Kit you're using?

Thanks

Hi 36degrees -

I just tried the code snippet in the design system:

`{% from "checkboxes/macro.njk" import govukCheckboxes %}

{{ govukCheckboxes({
  idPrefix: "nationality",
  name: "nationality",
  fieldset: {
    legend: {
      text: "What is your nationality?",
      isPageHeading: true,
      classes: "govuk-fieldset__legend--xl"
    }
  },
  hint: {
    text: "If you have dual nationality, select all options that are relevant to you."
  },
  items: [
    {
      value: "british",
      text: "British",
      hint: {
        text: "including English, Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish"
      }
    },
    {
      value: "irish",
      text: "Irish"
    },
    {
      value: "other",
      text: "Citizen of another country"
    }
  ]
}) }}`

Not sure on the versions - can you advise how I find out?

dashouse commented 5 years ago

Hi @jonathaninch I'm going to contact you on Slack as it might be an easier way to debug this problem.

edwardhorsford commented 5 years ago

I've again found a need for an 'or' option - would the team be open to a pr to add support for it? I hope I could follow the pattern used for radios to make them consistent.

NickColley commented 5 years ago

Hey @edwardhorsford I spoke to the team and that sounds like a good idea. Let me know if you need any help opening a pull request for that. If you don't have time you could open an issue on the GOV.UK Frontend repository.

If possible it would be good to consider what guidance changes might be needed: if this new feature should have an example on the Design System website or not.

Also having some clear real user use cases may help with reviewing your proposal.

edwardhorsford commented 5 years ago

@nickcolley thanks, I'll give it a go. I'm slammed this week so it probably won't be coming quickly.

I assume I'll be able to reuse much of what's mentioned about 'or' in the radios example. Probably with the addition of text that if it's a 'none of the above' option you may want to use js to toggle the other items.

NickColley commented 5 years ago

@edwardhorsford take care of yourself, don't do more work than you need to. You can always raise an issue if you're busy.

I assume I'll be able to reuse much of what's mentioned about 'or' in the radios example. Probably with the addition of text that if it's a 'none of the above' option you may want to use js to toggle the other items.

I think the 'none of the above' JavaScript logic may make this proposal more complicated. So perhaps an issue, rather than a pull request, with the different use cases and scenarios can open up that discussion on the best way to proceed?

edwardhorsford commented 5 years ago

@nickcolley I'm only suggesting mentioning it - not doing that bit of work.

NickColley commented 5 years ago

Hello everyone,

We've been made aware of some issues surrounding the conditional revealing content pattern.

We have made the decision not to change this pattern at the current time as we need more evidence of the impact to real users of assistive technologies.

We need your help to gather more feedback from user research that includes disabled people to help us make a decision in the future.

It would be really helpful if you could tell us what assistive technologies your participants have used if possible.

You can read our full investigation and conclusions here: https://github.com/alphagov/govuk-frontend/issues/979#issuecomment-530320650

alexnewmannn commented 4 years ago

Hey @nickcolley, we've just took our agent facing service to usability testing with someone who uses JAWS. Our biggest issue that we kept encountering was the use of conditional reveal, we think that with familiarity this issue would go away but it's definitely something we want to just work straight away without explanation.

User was presented with radio buttons as seen below: image The user selected yes and then tabbed as they thought they had completed the section. It read out the label for the conditionally revealed input (although this was inconsistent, we want to get a JAWS device over the coming weeks and try and replicate the different behaviours, as sometimes the label was getting skipped)

The user then used the cursor down option in JAWS to see what else was on the page, and the next thing was "no"; this caused a lot of confusion because they thought it had jumped into the next radio button group, so this caused a lot of tabbing back and forth to try and find out where that "no" was coming from, at this point we then explained where that conditional content was in relation to the page.

We have multiple other questions like this with similar content being revealed and this was a consistent theme, unsure which radio group they were in after entering the conditionally revealed content. This was also an issue when we had a legend explaining the question which was then being read out before the "no", because then it was as if tab had put them backwards in the form.

To summarise, user pressed tab after selecting radio button, which put them into the conditionally revealed content, they thought that was the next question so when they looked at the next part of the page and it was the remaining radio options they were completely unsure of where they were.

joelanman commented 4 years ago

thanks @alexnewmannn thats a really clear description of the issue!

tempertemper commented 4 years ago

We're using the Checkbox items with hints pattern in our service and I've noticed something in VoiceOver (can't comment on JAWS or NVDA). Here's an abbreviated version of the code from the example:

<fieldset aria-describedby="nationality-hint">
    <legend>
        <h1>What is your nationality?</h1>
    </legend>
    <span id="nationality-hint">
        If you have dual nationality, select all options that are relevant to you.
    </span>
    <div>
        <input id="nationality" name="nationality" type="checkbox" value="british" aria-describedby="nationality-item-hint">
        <label for="nationality">British</label>
        <span id="nationality-item-hint">
            including English, Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish
        </span>
    </div>
    <!-- etc. -->

The hint text for the aria-describedby on the input type="checkbox" supersedes the hint text for the aria-describedby on the fieldset. So the user only gets one hint read to them when they jump to the input through the tab index – the one on the input, rather than the legend.

It doesn't feel right that the hint text on the fieldset isn't read out, when it would be if there was no hint text on the input, but maybe it's deliberate to reduce noisiness or for some other reason. Anyone encountered this before?

NickColley commented 4 years ago

Hey @tempertemper,

I've raised your comment as a new issue on the GOV.UK Frontend repository for us to investigate: https://github.com/alphagov/govuk-frontend/issues/1696

jonnystening commented 4 years ago

Hey GDS,

Just wondering about nesting of heading inside <legend>. This is supposedly not valid HTML. Whats your view on this?

Screen Shot 2020-02-03 at 12 52 26 pm
peteryates commented 4 years ago

In the latest version of the standard headings are allowed inside legends along with phrasing content.

Content model: Phrasing content and headings (h1-h6 elements).

edwardhorsford commented 4 years ago

Here's another example of an 'or' option with the checkboxes. I think produced by GDS?

Screenshot 2020-04-03 at 11 08 11
joelanman commented 4 years ago

Yes this is from Offer Coronavirus support from your business - I think its a good example of where None is useful. It's not easy to ask a yes/no question here as the question would be 'Can you offer expertise' when we're interested in specific types.

edwardhorsford commented 4 years ago

Sent via @wayneddgu - another example of a service with an or option in checkboxes.

Screenshot 2020-04-15 at 11 17 58
frankieroberto commented 3 years ago

Another example of using a divider and a "None" option, from the Check an HGV is ready to cross the border (Kent Access Permit) service:

Screenshot 2021-04-08 at 14 00 27
frankieroberto commented 3 years ago

Here is another example from a prototype for the Pension Credit service. The team shared that:

Preliminary research suggests that some users need a way to tell us that none of the options provided apply - we have a good amount of evidence which outlines that our users are concerned about completing the application incorrectly or unknowingly hiding information.

Screen Shot 2021-04-08 at 14 00 01
frankieroberto commented 3 years ago

The ONS Design System has a mutually exclusive component which includes having a "None" option for checkboxes. Their implementation does the following:

CharlotteDowns commented 3 years ago

Working group review of adding a divider to checkboxes, April 2021

The Design System working group reviewed an initial design proposal for adding a divider to checkboxes or checkboxes: none of the above in April 2021. This variant of the checkbox component has been used in many live services already. Thanks to Frankie Roberto from the Department for Education for contributing it!

You can see a preview in the GOV.UK Design System.

Feedback

The majority of the group voted to add the proposal as an extension to the checkbox component. 9 of 10 members approved the component to be usable, consistent and versatile. Although members would like to see some issues resolved before proceeding.

Next steps

frankieroberto commented 3 years ago

I booked my COVID vaccination this morning via the NHS service.

They have a screen which uses checkboxes, including a "None of the above" checkbox. However there is no "or" divider, no javascript to prevent selecting "None" plus another checkbox, and no error message if you either submit the page with 2 checkboxes checked include "None" (it just treats this as "None" and ignores the others), and no error message if you submit the page with no checkbox checked.

I think this is a good example of where the new 'None' pattern would be helpful!

covid-vaccination-checkboxes

frankieroberto commented 3 years ago

Summary of conversation on x-gov Slack:

The Check an HGV service tested a "None of the above" option which did not initially have any javascript, which confused users ("how am I able to select all of these things and also 'none'?"). Adding the javascript behaviour made it clearer that this wasn’t an option.

The same service found that having an explicit "None of the above" option made it clearer that this was a valid option (compared to allowing all checkboxes to be unchecked).

jeremyandersondwp commented 3 years ago

Should we be using javascript to override browser behaviour (deselecting checkboxes) like this? Semantically, this "None of the above" checkbox is more like a "No" radio button. I don't think we should be pursuing this idea. It doesn't seem Accessible or Semantically correct to me.

calvin-lau-sig7 commented 3 years ago

New feature: Add a 'none' option and 'or' divider to checkboxes

You can now add a 'none' option to checkboxes. For example, 'None of the above' or 'None of these options apply to me'.

Use the 'none' option to allow users to state that none of the checkboxes apply to them. Otherwise, users would have to work out that they should leave all the checkboxes unticked. You can now also add an 'or' divider before the 'none' option. Use the 'or' divider to make the 'none' option more visible to users.

Read the full release notes to see what’s changed.

Thanks to Frankie Roberto for contributing this improvement and everyone for discussing their research and experience with us.

calvin-lau-sig7 commented 3 years ago

We’ve updated the guidance for checkboxes

The updated guidance gives more information about how to use conditionally revealing questions in your service, and what you need to consider.

Problems we wanted to solve

An earlier version of the guidance did not clearly describe what can be conditionally revealed.

Using conditional reveals for text content

Use of conditional reveals to reveal text failed WCAG 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value in an audit of GOV.UK.

When text is conditionally revealed, it is unlikely to be discovered by a screen reader user in 'forms mode' as the text is not focusable.

Text content in a conditional reveal should be avoided.

Using conditional reveals with multiple form fields

In our research, a user did not seem to understand the structure of a page when it conditionally revealed multiple questions.

Alex Newman, Department for Work and Pensions, shared similar findings from their user research as a comment in the backlog discussion for checkboxes

A Lead Auditor at the Digital Accessibility Centre (DAC), who often audits government services, told us that in their experience, 'long' conditional reveals caused navigation issues for users. Conditional reveals increase the length of a page which can be disorientating for users.

A ‘short’ conditional reveal, such as a single input field is usually fine.

What we decided and what has changed

We've updated the guidance to:

What’s next

If you’ve done any user research involving conditionally revealed questions, particularly with users of assistive technologies, tell us what you’ve learned by adding a comment to this issue.

We’ll keep looking for opportunities to learn more about how conditionally revealed questions can cause problems for users in our own user research as well.

calvin-lau-sig7 commented 3 years ago

We’ve removed an issue about conditional reveals from our accessibility statement

In September 2020, we added a non-compliance issue to our accessibility statement that said:

users are not always notified when conditionally revealed content associated with a radio button or checkbox is expanded or collapsed - this fails WCAG 2.1 success criterion 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value

As part of our plan to fix this issue, we carried out user research to find out if all use of conditional reveals was an accessibility issue (rather than how they’re used). We also asked service teams to share their own findings with us.

Findings from our research

We found no evidence that not meeting the criterion that ‘users are not always notified’ of conditional reveals caused issues. All users we tested with were able to complete the task without issues. Other service teams also shared similar findings with us.

We took these findings to a Lead Auditor at the Digital Accessibility Centre (DAC), who said that a ‘short’ conditional reveal (such as a single input field) is usually fine and that conditional reveals did not automatically fail WCAG 2.1.

As a way to notify users, we proposed adding an aria-expanded attribute to radio buttons, which we’re exploring with the ARIA group. They told us to think about whether this notification is actually useful to users (rather than excessive noise), which suggested to us that this issue might not be as much of a problem as we’d thought.

Problems with ‘long’ conditional reveals

However, we did observe that conditional reveals can abruptly make a page longer, and that can be disorientating for users.

We’ve fixed this as a separate issue by adding guidance that tells service teams to keep conditional reveals simple.

Removing conditional reveals as a non-compliance issue

Finding solutions to meet accessibility requirements of all users is difficult. That’s why WCAG 2.1 is based on principles, not technology and emphasises the need to think about the different ways that people interact with content.

In our research and investigation to do this, we’ve learned that conditional reveals are very widely used in services (and in other applications), so this is clearly an area for us to continue working on. We’ve also learned that they’re not as severe an issue as we’d thought to be considered non-compliant with WCAG requirements.

What’s next

We’ll continue to look for opportunities to test alternative approaches in user research and encourage new approaches from our community.

We’ll also continue the discussion with ARIA to extend aria-expanded to radios.

If you’ve done any user research involving conditionally revealed questions, particularly with users of assistive technologies, tell us what you’ve learned by adding a comment to this issue.

calvin-lau-sig7 commented 3 years ago

Improved radios and checkboxes in forced colors mode

As part of the GOV.UK Frontend v3.13.1 ‘fix release’, we’ve made some visual improvements to radio and checkbox controls for users in forced colors mode.

Thanks to Adam Liptrot for reporting this issue.

a184studio commented 2 years ago

Hi All, @edwardhorsford

Did anyone get to the bottom of the behaviour when "None" is selected in conjunction with another checkbox given that selecting more than one item is the key here.

Tested well enough etc, I see that its on the Gov page now. But its a bit light tough in this chat about how it worked for people.

joelanman commented 2 years ago

@a184studio there is more discussion specifically about None here: https://github.com/alphagov/govuk-frontend/pull/2151 Our JavaScript means you can't select None with another checkbox, and in research that makes sense to users. If JavaScript fails for any reason, we have guidance that it should be validated on the server and the user gets an error message.

a184studio commented 2 years ago

Cheers @joelanman. I'll have a read.

abbott567 commented 2 years ago

Just so it doesn't get lost in the void, I'm leaving a comment here about a conversation we had on slack around the accessibility behaviour of the "none of the above" Javascript solution.

In most cases, when you change anything which does not have focus, you need to announce it to a screen reader. I had assumed in this case it was unnecessary as the behaviour is implicit. By clicking none of the above, you'd fully expect any selections already selected above to become irrelevant.

However, I had sought clarity on whether this was a deliberate design decision or a happy accident. @frankieroberto did confirm it was a deliberate decision, but if there is any user research to suggest it is an issue then it would be useful to share it.