We publish the engine (axe-core) and the "core" playwright integration library Slack is using (@axe-core/playwright) as open source, but if you're interested in what the Slack team has described in this blog, we also have a paid offering called axe Developer Hub (https://www.deque.com/axe/developer-hub) that offers a similar workflow to what the Slack folks describe here: It hooks into end-to-end tests you already have to add in accessibility testing without needing a ton of code changes to your test suite.
It's very enlightening to see which features the Slack folks prioritized for their setup and to see some of the stuff they were able to do by going deep on integration with Playwright specifically. It's not often you are lucky enough to get feedback as strong as "we cared about <feature> enough to invest a bunch of engineering time into it".
If you're interested in building these sort of accessibility tools, my team is hiring! https://www.deque.com/careers/senior-accessibility-tool-deve...
And if you are willing to answer some other questions regarding axe-core itself, I might have few.
If you have general questions about axe-core, the best place to ask is our axe Community slack instance (https://accessibility.deque.com/axe-community). If you have a specific issue you'd like us to investigate, try https://github.com/dequelabs/axe-core/issues
It's amazing how much a screenshot will do for my motivation to fix a frontend bug. Visually identifying severity is much easier than reading and making a mental judgement.
I'm sure other tools are great too but I find Cleanshot on macOS makes it super convenient to do it, so there's no excuse not to document reports with images and/or videos.
I do the same with pull requests. Words are almost always essential, but demonstrating bugs/changes/features directly through accompanying visuals is hard to beat.
First, they didn't play in all browsers at the company I worked at. That meant I had to either download it, or use a different browser for that.
But even then, it was a game "guess what the CSR thought was wrong" in the video. Usually after watching a rather long intro sequence before getting to the actual bug.
If the company is trying to replace written bug reports with videos for speed or convenience, it's a nightmare for the devs.
If it's just an add-on to show the specifics, then it might actually be good. I rarely got those.
Also, more subjectively, the snippets don't really match the aesthetics of the rest of the site. The pseudo-macOS rendering inside the black borders is strange, as is the choice to use different monospace fonts for filenames and code snippets.
Pretty sure just about every other option is pretty likeable compared to Teams!
1. Teams automatically creates a chat group for every Teams calendar event. This can include external attendees.
2. Teams is useful for chat & meetings, but Teams spaces are hugely helpful as document repositories, too, and it's additionally easy to add things like Gantt charts and other enriched content types through add-ins.
And a bonus one:
3. The ability to seamlessly transfer a Teams meeting connection between arbitrary devices (laptop -> desktop, phone -> laptop, etc).
Great to see Slack using a similar combo!
We didn’t have a dedicated accessibility team though, so I paired it with a shit list which the team worked through in less than a year.
It's not much but it feels like when I'm on YouTube with a device that doesn't have adblock and a short ad plays before the video.
It's not related to accessibility, but it's still UX.
I'll keep it in mind, thanks.
Discord does the same bullshit and this works there too.
(This assumes you’re not logging out when closing the slack/discord tab. Sometimes it just doesn’t work with Slack and you have to do a full login.)
Should be "complement".
Some of their recent releases have left a lot to be desired.
Probably most IRC clients are more accessible.
As soon as you start thinking about the side features. they are not comparable.
