-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 65
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.
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
MCKIN-12227 Survey table labels and roles #67
MCKIN-12227 Survey table labels and roles #67
Conversation
setup.py
Outdated
@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ def package_data(pkg, roots): | |||
|
|||
setup( | |||
name='xblock-poll', | |||
version='1.8.9', | |||
version='1.9', |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We'll get to the full review next sprint, but for the version I think you should keep the patch number, so 1.9.0
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@xitij2000, this doesn't look like a big change, so shouldn't we just bump the patch version (1.8.10)?
I think bumping minor would be more suitable for a PR like #66.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@Agrendalath Yeah, I wasn't commenting on the version bump itself, but mainly the format of the version number. I think 1.8.10 makes more sense here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@Agrendalath I have bumped the version as well. Please go ahead
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
cc: @xitij2000 as the reviewer here.
d79f7c4
to
9306118
Compare
@wittjeff This is a PR to improve accessibility of an XBlock that's included in edx-platform. Would you be able to have a quick look and see if it's going in the right direction? |
@murad-hubib some test cases are failing, could you fix those in the meantime. |
@msaqib52 @murad-hubib Note that there are some failures that are not caused by this PR. |
@murad-hubib @xitij2000 You code seems mostly sensible but I don't feel confident in saying so without seeing it live somewhere. Also it just seems to make the code "look" semantically more like the Poll component I see in Studio, so I don't know where these forked. Is there a sandbox with your changes? And by the way, I don't mind looking over changes like this, but please understand that my inbox has a steady heavy flow of Github PR updates, and I may not notice when you tag me. So if I don't respond, just email me directly. |
Here's DOM output from a poll in current Studio:
|
@wittjeff Thanks for having a look! I will try to set up a sandbox with this version of the component soon and will link it here when it's ready. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@wittjeff Here is the sandbox for this PR:
- LMS: https://xblock-poll-test.opencraft.hosting/
- Studio: https://studio.xblock-poll-test.opencraft.hosting/
I am giving this conditional approval based on testing on Orca which seems to work better with this.
👍
- I tested this: tested using NVDA/Windows and Orca/Linux
- I read through the code
- I checked for accessibility issues (some issues with NVDA)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Code looks like proper HTML + ARIA.
Thanks @wittjeff! |
…bib/xblock-poll into murad/12227-survey-labels-roles
@xitij2000 We have fixed the test that relates to this PR. But some other test is failing. Can you please check If this is Flake Please rebuild this. |
Yes, this is a flaky test ATM, we have a future task to fix this. If you're like to contribute a fix, it will be welcome. I will not block this PR for that test, and since the other tests seem to have passed, this is good to merge. |
These are supportive attributes for accessibility and doesn't have any visual change
Ticket:
https://edx-wiki.atlassian.net/browse/MCKIN-12227
@xitij2000 Please review and merge it as per your schedule. Also please let me know if we need to bump the version as well