"Target Size Enhanced" - atomic rule by Jym77 · Pull Request #2279 · act-rules/act-rules.github.io

Jym77 · 2025-02-06T15:31:15Z

New take at "Target Size" rule, as an automated rule with definitions, following CG decision.

For first pass, please focus reviews on the overall structure rather than the details of each definition 🙂

Closes issue(s):

closes Adjusting the applicability of composite rules #2214
closes Add target size enhanced rule #1919 (supersedes it)
Partly supersedes Target size minimum #2167 (missing the "minimum" rule)

Need for Call for Review:
This will require a 2 weeks Call for Review (new rule)

Pull Request Etiquette

When creating PR:

Make sure you're requesting to pull a branch (right side) to the develop branch (left side).
Make sure you do not remove the "How to Review and Approve" section in your pull request description

After creating PR:

Add yourself (and co-authors) as "Assignees" for PR.
Add label to indicate if it's a Rule, Definition or Chore.
Link the PR to any issue it solves. This will be done automatically by referencing the issue at the top of this comment in the indicated place.
Optionally request feedback from anyone in particular by assigning them as "Reviewers".

When merging a PR:

Close any issue that the PR resolves. This will happen automatically upon merging if the PR was correctly linked to the issue, e.g. by referencing the issue at the top of this comment.

How to Review And Approve

Go to the “Files changed” tab
Here you will have the option to leave comments on different lines.
Once the review is completed, find the “Review changes” button in the top right, select “Approve” (if you are really confident in the rule) or "Request changes" and click “Submit review”.
Make sure to also review the proposed Call for Review period. In case of disagreement, the longer period wins.

Jym77 · 2025-02-06T15:32:22Z

@@ -0,0 +1,819 @@
+---
+id: gi8qkf


For first pass of review, please focus on global structure to se whether this is a good structure for the rule. We'll discuss details of the definitions later.

dan-tripp-siteimprove

The general structure looks good to me. I am interested in the definition of "inline". I look forward to that part.

carlosapaduarte

Great work so far. Looking forward to moving this one forward.

carlosapaduarte · 2025-02-07T10:37:43Z

+title: Clickable area
+key: clickable-area
+unambiguous: true
+objective: false


Why is this definition not objective?

Because I feel that "topmost event target" is not really objective.

carlosapaduarte · 2025-02-07T11:13:56Z

+- the element is [rendered on a line]; or
+- the element is [User Agent controlled][user agent controlled component]; or
+- the element has [essential size][].


Just wondering if these should be in the expectation?

The full point of #2214 and the CG discussion was to have them as Inapplicable 🤷

carlosapaduarte · 2025-02-07T12:04:17Z

+</body>
+```
+
+### Inapplicable


Shouldn't we have one with a clickable area that is not a semantic widget?

🤔 Wouldn't that be bad for 1.3.1?
a <span onclick="alert('Hello')">Say hello</span> would fail 1.3.1. We can have one (with associated caveats), but I'm afraid it would cause problems for tools that do not have the same separation as ACT rules and would (rightfully) fail it.

Co-authored-by: Carlos Duarte <carlosapaduarte@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Kevin White <kevin@w3.org>

netlify · 2025-02-20T13:42:31Z

✅ Deploy Preview for act-rules ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	`77a7611`
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/act-rules/deploys/67b73d2c56e6190008f8b3d2
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-2279--act-rules.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

Comments answered.

Added definition.

dan-tripp-siteimprove · 2025-02-24T19:55:02Z

@@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
+---
+title: Observed as a pointer events target


Could the words "observed as" be cut out?

I know you added those words recently, so I assume you see considerable value in them. Still I must ask this, because when I first read those words, it made me wonder: is there another term called "pointer events target" that is different from "observed as a pointer events target"? If so, what does the venn diagram of these two sets look like? After I read the background and searched elsewhere for a minute, I arrived at the answers "no, or at least: not officially" and "n/a". If I'm the only reader that will go through that thought process: then it doesn't matter. If I'm not: then we have a cognitive load question here for future readers.

The background is essential commentary, but I'm not sure that it's essential to have it in the wording of the term itself. I figure most conversations about target size will just talk about "pointer event targets" and won't need to get into the details.

To summarize: the value of having "observed as" in the wording of the term itself is, IMO, outweighed by the cost of the added cognitive load.

dan-tripp-siteimprove · 2025-02-24T20:05:48Z

@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+---
+title: In a Block of Text


I was going to look at the examples of this PR via the new "deploy preview" functionality, which is here. When I clicked on the "Open in a new tab" links for the examples, they didn't work, because they're pointing to w3.org rather than deploy-preview-2279--act-rules.netlify.app. Is this a known limitation? If so, can I help fix it?

HelenBurge · 2025-06-12T14:24:42Z

Please assign yourself if able to work on this PR as a complex one!

Jym77 · 2026-07-06T07:39:36Z

+
+An element is _observed as a pointer events target_ when all the following conditions are true:
+
+- the element is a [semantic `widget`][semantic role]; and


Question: Some "composite widgets" are actually not the real targets and should probably be ignored by this definition: "menu", "menubar", "tablist", "radiogroup", "listbox", "tree", "grid", "treegrid".

We need to look a bit more into that list to agree on it.

I figure: let's start with the ARIA spec for "widget roles" where it gives us two lists:
Let list1 = "The following roles act as standalone user interface widgets or as part of larger, composite widgets".
Let list2 = "The following roles act as composite user interface widgets".

AFAICS the "clickable roles" are: list1 minus progressbar minus tabpanel plus listbox plus combobox.

minus progressbar because it's not clickable.

minus tabpanel because it's not clickable.

plus listbox because I figure the listbox is the first thing that the user clicks, and it could be smaller than the options which it contains. the "option" role (= child of listbox ~= HTML <option>) is already in list1.

plus combobox because in this APG combobox example the first / "outer" clickable thing is the element which has role="combobox". The other four APG combobox examples: same. I consulted the APG rather than the ARIA spec for this, because spec-wise, combobox is over my head. But I understand the APG examples well enough.

And I figure this rule is obliged to follow the ARIA spec wording that "separator (when focusable)" (that is: only when focusable) is included in list1.

I don't know what to do about <div tabindex="0" onclick="alert('yes')">x</div>.

I don't know what to do about <div tabindex="0" onclick="alert('yes')">x</div>.

I think this is handled by the Background of that definition:

Not all HTML elements that can actually be targeted by a pointer event match this definition. For example, an author may build custom buttons without giving them an appropriate role or making them [focusable][]; or content overflowing the [border box][] of an element is clickable, but that element might not match the definition if the [border box][] is off-screen. Elements that can actually be targeted by pointer events but do not match this definition likely fail either [Success Criterion 4.1.2 Name, Role, Value][sc412] or [Success Criterion 2.1.1 Keyboard][sc211].

This will make a great boundary/verbose example one day.

Jym77 added 3 commits February 6, 2025 12:06

Copy files

012034e

add missing assets

7ba8214

Make rule atomic

e74008e

Jym77 added the Rule Use this label for a new rule that does not exist already label Feb 6, 2025

Jym77 self-assigned this Feb 6, 2025

Jym77 commented Feb 6, 2025

View reviewed changes

Jym77 requested review from HelenBurge, WilcoFiers, carlosapaduarte, dan-tripp-siteimprove, daniel-montalvo, dd8, giacomo-petri and kengdoj February 6, 2025 15:33

dan-tripp-siteimprove previously approved these changes Feb 6, 2025

View reviewed changes

carlosapaduarte previously requested changes Feb 7, 2025

View reviewed changes

iadawn reviewed Feb 7, 2025

View reviewed changes

Jym77 added the reviewers wanted label Feb 7, 2025

Jym77 and others added 4 commits February 9, 2025 16:29

Apply suggestions from code review

5bd5047

Co-authored-by: Carlos Duarte <carlosapaduarte@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Kevin White <kevin@w3.org>

Merge branch 'develop' into target-size-definitions

f8e547d

Rename and clarify definition

3d6e1a5

Apply comments from reviews

a3af500

Jym77 requested review from carlosapaduarte and iadawn February 20, 2025 13:42

Add 'inline' definition

77a7611

Jym77 requested a review from dan-tripp-siteimprove February 20, 2025 14:33

dan-tripp-siteimprove requested changes Feb 24, 2025

View reviewed changes

WilcoFiers mentioned this pull request May 1, 2025

Add target size enhanced rule #1919

Closed

HelenBurge removed the reviewers wanted label May 29, 2025

HelenBurge added the help wanted label Jun 12, 2025

Jym77 commented Jul 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

		@@ -0,0 +1,37 @@
		---
		title: Observed as a pointer events target


		An element is _observed as a pointer events target_ when all the following conditions are true:

		- the element is a [semantic `widget`][semantic role]; and

Uh oh!

Conversation

Jym77 commented Feb 6, 2025

Pull Request Etiquette

When creating PR:

After creating PR:

When merging a PR:

How to Review And Approve

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

dan-tripp-siteimprove left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

carlosapaduarte left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

netlify Bot commented Feb 20, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

✅ Deploy Preview for act-rules ready!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

HelenBurge commented Jun 12, 2025

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

netlify Bot commented Feb 20, 2025 •

edited

Loading