You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Is your change request related to a problem? Please describe.
When using show_source the code snippet has a span and codelineno ID per line, e.g. </span><span id="__span-0-35"><a id="__codelineno-0-35" name="__codelineno-0-35"></a>.
If referencing the same line in two different code snippets (e.g. the same line from two different modules given on the same page or the same method being referenced as it is inherited from the parent abstract base class in a module), there are duplicate instances of the same spand and codeline ID. Accessibility checkers complain about this, and with good reason!
Describe the solution you'd like
Ideally, each source code snippet would have some kind of unique code (maybe a random hash?) that is added to the IDs.
Describe alternatives you've considered
For now, I've simply ignored these types of IDs in my Accessibility checker, but it is non-ideal...
Additional context
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Is your change request related to a problem? Please describe.
When using
show_source
the code snippet has aspan
andcodelineno
ID per line, e.g.</span><span id="__span-0-35"><a id="__codelineno-0-35" name="__codelineno-0-35"></a>
.If referencing the same line in two different code snippets (e.g. the same line from two different modules given on the same page or the same method being referenced as it is inherited from the parent abstract base class in a module), there are duplicate instances of the same spand and codeline ID. Accessibility checkers complain about this, and with good reason!
Describe the solution you'd like
Ideally, each source code snippet would have some kind of unique code (maybe a random hash?) that is added to the IDs.
Describe alternatives you've considered
For now, I've simply ignored these types of IDs in my Accessibility checker, but it is non-ideal...
Additional context
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: