Reduce scope of headings check

[alvaromontoro]

Types of changes

• Bug fix (a non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New feature (a non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)

Description

Code changes for #83:

• Remove code that generated false positives
• Update library
• Update demo page
• Update tests to fit new changes

The general idea was to remove the opinionated code. The remaining code should be ok, it will highlight some errors... but because of the reduction in the scope, many other errors will not be highlighted.

Link(s)

Screenshot(s)

Checklist:

• I have thoroughly read the CONTRIBUTING guidelines.
• I understand my pull request will be thoroughly reviewed at high detail.
• I understand the work in my pull request will only be available in the next version release of Checka11y.css and not in the current version release.
• I confirm the work in this pull request is valid according to my findings and is not something for anything personal.
• I have updated the README and/or features.md where and if applicable (still put an x if you have considered this but thought there was nothing to add or modify).
• I have added myself to the contributors section in package.json (still put an x if you have considered this but decided not to add yourself).
• I have checked I have not committed any accidental files.
• I have tested all the main modern browsers (I.e. Chrome, Firefox, Edge, Safari - please leave this unchecked if there were any browsers listed you could not test and list them in the help section with details why you couldn't test that browser)
• I have run the automated tests and added new ones to cover new code.
• All new and existing a11y checks still work correctly (compare your local test/index.html to the test/index.html in the master branch).

Help

Tested on Chrome, Safari, and Firefox on Mac.

[jackdomleo7]

Thank you for doing this! Because of the uniqueness of the project being a CSS-only a11y tool, we are restricted to how advanced the features can be, and I'm ok with that 🙂 I really appreciate this work and I'm grateful you were able to prevent false errors being shown.

I'll be sure before the next release to add something in the README about how limited the tool can be, but also the uniqueness of the project.