Axe DevTools Pro ACT Implementation

This page is under development and has not been approved by the working group.

Number of Rules Implemented
	Consistent	Partially consistent
WCAG 2 rules	0	0
Proposed rules	3	3

Implemented Rules

Rule Name	Type	Consistency
Form field label is descriptive	Proposed Rule	Partial
HTML page title is descriptive	Proposed Rule	Consistent
Image accessible name is descriptive	Proposed Rule	Consistent
Image not in the accessibility tree is decorative	Proposed Rule	Partial
Error message describes invalid form field value	Proposed Rule	Partial
Element in sequential focus order has visible focus	Proposed Rule	Consistent

About Axe DevTools Pro Results

Axe DevTools Pro combines the automated results of axe-core, and results from axe Intelligent Guided Test (IGT) tools. Tools can produced multiple issue types. The ID of each issue type is given as the name of the procedure, with the tool that returns it in brackets. For example `alt-text-not-meaningful (Images)` is the `alt-text-not-meaningful` issue type reported by the `Images` tool.

Results in this page are taken from a public test report published by Deque Systems. Data is published using the EARL+JSON-LD data format.

Implementation Details

Form field label is descriptive

This rule is implemented by Axe DevTools Pro using the label-visible-not-descriptive (forms) procedure. The implementation is partially consistent with the Form field label is descriptive proposed rule. It covers 10 of the 14 examples. For 4 examples no results were reported. This can happen when examples are newer then the test results. The implementation correctly reports which success criteria are failed by this rule. See understanding ACT consistency.

Success Criteria
Expected	Reported
2.4.6 Headings and Labels	2.4.6 Headings and Labels

Test Results
	label-visible-not-descriptive (forms)
Passed Example 1	passed
Passed Example 2	passed
Passed Example 3	passed
Passed Example 4	passed
Passed Example 5	passed
Passed Example 6	passed
Failed Example 1	failed
Failed Example 2	failed
Failed Example 3	failed
Failed Example 4	untested
Failed Example 5	untested
Inapplicable Example 1	inapplicable
Inapplicable Example 2	untested
Inapplicable Example 3	untested

HTML page title is descriptive

This rule is implemented by Axe DevTools Pro using the title-not-meaningful (structure) procedure. The implementation is fully consistent with the HTML page title is descriptive proposed rule. It covers 5 of the 6 examples. On 1 example the implementation cannot tell the outcome. This is often because of technical limitations in tools. The implementation correctly reports which success criteria are failed by this rule. See understanding ACT consistency.

Success Criteria
Expected	Reported
2.4.2 Page Titled	2.4.2 Page Titled

Test Results
	title-not-meaningful (structure)
Passed Example 1	passed
Passed Example 2	passed
Passed Example 3	passed
Failed Example 1	failed
Failed Example 2	failed
Inapplicable Example 1	cannot tell

Image accessible name is descriptive

This rule is implemented by Axe DevTools Pro using the alt-text-short-text-not-meaningful (Images) procedure. The implementation is fully consistent with the Image accessible name is descriptive proposed rule. It covers all 16 examples. The implementation correctly reports which success criteria are failed by this rule. See understanding ACT consistency.

Success Criteria
Expected	Reported
1.1.1 Non-text Content	1.1.1 Non-text Content

Test Results
	alt-text-short-text-not-meaningful (Images)
Passed Example 1	passed
Passed Example 2	passed
Passed Example 3	passed
Failed Example 1	failed
Failed Example 2	failed
Failed Example 3	failed
Inapplicable Example 1	passed
Inapplicable Example 2	passed
Inapplicable Example 3	passed
Inapplicable Example 4	passed
Inapplicable Example 5	inapplicable
Inapplicable Example 6	passed
Inapplicable Example 7	passed
Inapplicable Example 8	passed
Inapplicable Example 9	inapplicable
Inapplicable Example 10	passed

Image not in the accessibility tree is decorative

This rule is implemented by Axe DevTools Pro using the alt-text-missing + semantic-hidden (images) procedure. The implementation is partially consistent with the Image not in the accessibility tree is decorative proposed rule. It covers 17 of the 20 examples. The implementation correctly reports which success criteria are failed by this rule. See understanding ACT consistency.

Success Criteria
Expected	Reported
1.1.1 Non-text Content	1.1.1 Non-text Content

Test Results
	alt-text-missing + semantic-hidden (images)
Passed Example 1	passed
Passed Example 2	passed
Passed Example 3	passed
Passed Example 4	passed
Passed Example 5	passed
Failed Example 1	failed
Failed Example 2	failed
Failed Example 3	passed
Failed Example 4	passed
Failed Example 5	passed
Inapplicable Example 1	passed
Inapplicable Example 2	inapplicable
Inapplicable Example 3	passed
Inapplicable Example 4	passed
Inapplicable Example 5	passed
Inapplicable Example 6	passed
Inapplicable Example 7	passed
Inapplicable Example 8	passed
Inapplicable Example 9	passed
Inapplicable Example 10	inapplicable

Error message describes invalid form field value

This rule is implemented by Axe DevTools Pro using the form-error-required-unclear + instructions-not-included (forms) procedure. The implementation is partially consistent with the Error message describes invalid form field value proposed rule. It covers 7 of the 9 examples. The implementation reports different success criteria as failed from what is expected by this rule. See understanding ACT consistency.

Success Criteria
Expected	Reported
3.3.1 Error Identification	3.3.2 Labels or Instructions

Test Results
	form-error-required-unclear + instructions-not-included (forms)
Passed Example 1	passed
Passed Example 2	passed
Passed Example 3	passed
Failed Example 1	failed
Failed Example 2	failed
Failed Example 3	passed
Failed Example 4	passed
Failed Example 5	failed
Inapplicable Example 1	inapplicable

Element in sequential focus order has visible focus

This rule is implemented by Axe DevTools Pro using the focus-indicator-missing (keyboard) procedure. The implementation is fully consistent with the Element in sequential focus order has visible focus proposed rule. It covers all 9 examples. The implementation correctly reports which success criteria are failed by this rule. See understanding ACT consistency.

Success Criteria
Expected	Reported
2.4.7 Focus Visible	2.4.7 Focus Visible

Test Results
	focus-indicator-missing (keyboard)
Passed Example 1	passed
Passed Example 2	passed
Passed Example 3	passed
Passed Example 4	passed
Failed Example 1	failed
Inapplicable Example 1	inapplicable
Inapplicable Example 2	passed
Inapplicable Example 3	inapplicable
Inapplicable Example 4	passed