MS Monaco Consideration

[kenashworth]

https://github.com/Microsoft/monaco-editor/labels/accessibility
https://github.com/Microsoft/vscode/labels/accessibility

The Monaco Editor seems to be WCAG compliant, and both teams track against accessibility (Monaco is derived from VSCode). It looks harder to integrate (because I've been working with CodeMirror for 6 years) and I think is a larger codebase, but being actually WCAG compliant might have a snowball's chance of not getting shot down.

[kenashworth]

https://github.com/Microsoft/monaco-editor/wiki/Monaco-Editor-Accessibility-Guide
https://github.com/Microsoft/monaco-editor/wiki/Accessibility-Guide-for-Integrators

Some guides for Accessibility when using and integrating

[kenashworth]

Drawback is it doesn't work on mobile(?)

[melchoyce]

@westonruter Any way we could figure out what they're doing to make it accessible, and then port that over to CodeMirror?

[westonruter]

I think CodeMirror is going to win out regardless because of its much longer history (since 2011 instead of 2016), number of contributors (586 vs 17) and releases (109 vs 13) and stability (5.28.0 vs 0.10.0). So I think that CodeMirror should just look itself at any benefits that MS Monaco is doing. For our part, we are using CodeMirror's contentEditable mode which is better for compatibility. I've commented on the CodeMirror issue to raise the question about what it would take to address any accessibility defects: codemirror/codemirror5#4604 (comment)

Unless there is clear overall benefits of MS Monaco over CodeMirror, I'll close this.