RFR (JDK11/doc-only) 8199176: Accessibility issues in java.base docs
huizhe.wang at oracle.com
Wed Mar 21 22:47:03 UTC 2018
They look ok. They actually go better with the package name when they
are just 1 level down instead of 2, that is, <h2> rather than <h3> for
the titles when the package name is <h1>. If we don't want the strong
emphasis on the titles, we could lower the package name generated by
javadoc to <h2> instead of <h1>. Then we could keep the <h3>s.
Most of the package-info pages have already used <h2> for titles, which
is why we're fixing only a handful of them here. Consider:
*Currently using <h2>:*
In the later page, it actually started with <h1> :
<h1><a id="jvm_mods"></a>Summary of relevant Java Virtual Machine
*Currently using <h3>:*
On 3/21/2018 2:39 PM, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
> On 3/21/18 2:28 PM, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> On 21/03/2018 19:08, Joe Wang wrote:
>>> *Item 3*: Heading leavels should only increase by one
>>> This is due to the javadoc tool generates a header with an
>>> addition of headings, in this particular case, <h1>. The fix for
>>> this particular case is to replace the <h3>s with <h2>.
>> I assume this has the effect of increasing the size of the headings.
>> Does it look okay? I assume many of these usages of h3 choose that to
>> avoid heading in very large font.
> I know accessibility fixes are important, but usability is important
> too. The uses of h3 were previously consistent across different pages.
> We could remediate the problem either by figuring a design that has
> javadoc put a similar set of headers on every page (thus rendering
> this changeset unnecessary) or else changing the stylesheet so that
> <h2> on a package-summary page looks the same as <h3> on a class page
> (which sounds icky, even as I type it.)
> -- Jon
More information about the core-libs-dev