December 18, 2020
While working with the team at DEV this past quarter on their open source community platform, Forem, they requested I review a Pull Request for accessibility on GitHub that introduced a new Chrome-only CSS feature:
content-visibility. I'd missed the announcement of this feature months earlier by Chrome advocates, so my first step was to read up on it to understand the potential accessibility impact.
According to a post on Web.dev:
content-visibilityenables the user agent to skip an element's rendering work, including layout and painting, until it is needed. Because rendering is skipped, if a large portion of your content is off-screen, leveraging the content-visibility property makes the initial user load much faster. It also allows for faster interactions with the on-screen content.
This feature is meant to improve page load performance by skipping over content detected as being "off-screen", or outside of the viewport. There are two possible values for
The Forem PR from Ben Halpern included
content-visiblity: auto, which marks content as off-screen that will become visible in the viewport through scrolling, telling the browser to skip it in the initial rendering phase. The
hidden value tells the browser to skip content that shouldn't ever automatically render on-screen through scrolling, more akin to CSS
display: none or
visibility: hidden but with extra performance benefits. Potential use cases cited are advanced virtual scrollers and measuring layout.
Neat. But my spidey accessibility senses went off as soon as I read those words: off-screen and rendering. We use off-screen content in the accessibility world to render content for the purpose of exposing to screen readers, such as visually-hidden headings or
<span> elements inside buttons.
My initial thought was that
content-visibility: auto could pose an access problem on initial load by suppressing part of the page outline from screen readers, so I set out to test it.
The Web.dev team included a nice demo on Codepen that I used right away, since a local Forem instance requires a more involved setup to mimic the live Dev.to site. I noticed the Codepen authors had marked up
.story DIV elements with CSS
content-visibility: auto applied, with headings preceding those DIVs (so therefore outside). They'd possibly anticipated an accessibility issue, but didn't write about it in the post.
Headings and other content will be suppressed by
content-visibility if considered off-screen. That means content will be hidden on load from the Elements List in NVDA and rotor in Voiceover, impacting the overall page outline and summary read aloud.
To test this, I moved an h2 in and out of a DIV with
content-visibility: auto applied. When the heading is outside of the DIV like they set it up in the demo, it gets rendered. Here's a screenshot of the Elements List in NVDA:
When moved inside of the
.story DIV with
content-visibility: auto, the heading is suppressed by screen readers including NVDA (as expected):
This means that if you're using
content-visibility on sections of content including headings and semantic structure, screen reader users won't be able to benefit from that structure on load. This unfortunately degrades accessibility in favor of loading performance.
Based on my testing, I recommend keeping headings and landmark elements outside of regions styled with
Without this approach of crafting semantic markup for rendering on load,
content-visibility would negate the purpose of including semantic structure to begin with, since it would require scrolling the page to have a complete and accurate page outline read aloud. Likely not what developers would intend by using it!
Note: the PR from Forem ended up marking only the footer content with
content-visibility: auto since it's at the bottom of the page and would theoretically benefit from deferred rendering. But one caveat to the Forem usage was the site's infinite scrolling, where users couldn't reach the footer anyway...so whether that content would be accessible on page load in assistive technology was moot. See the PR for more discussion if you're curious!