Fixes:#912 W3C standards for the landing.html file #1044
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
ujjwaldubey1
changed the title
ujjwaldubey1
changed the title
|
This PR is stale because it has been open 45 days with no activity. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Pull Request for Fixing W3C Standards in landing.html
Summary
This PR addresses W3C compliance issues in the landing.html file of the caMicroscope application. Changes include:
Adding the lang attribute to the tag for better accessibility.![]()
tags have appropriate alt attributes.
Adding a proper DOCTYPE declaration for HTML5 compliance.
Ensuring all
Removing deprecated attributes like frameborder from <iframe> elements.
Enhancing the semantic structure by using ARIA roles where necessary.
Fixing minor indentation and structure issues for better readability.
Motivation
Testing
Verified HTML structure using the W3C Markup Validation Service.
Manual testing performed in:
Google Chrome (latest version)
Mozilla Firefox (latest version)
Microsoft Edge (latest version)
Ensured that all changes did not impact the visual layout or existing functionality of the page.
Questions
1.Are there any additional attributes or roles you'd recommend for enhanced accessibility?
2.Should we implement automated W3C validation checks as part of our CI/CD pipeline?