[myabc]

Ticket

https://community.openproject.org/wp/SE-710

What are you trying to accomplish?

Scans a first batch of pages with axe in their feature specs and fixes what the scans found: work packages index and show, backlogs editing, boards index and management, meetings index and agenda. Sister PR #25892 did the same for Lookbook component previews. Parent feature: SE-659.

Every scan so far had to stay inside #content. The modal overlay in the base layout keeps its CDK focus trap enabled on every page, and the trap's hidden anchor elements carry aria-hidden="true" with tabindex="0", failing the aria-hidden-focus rule on every page. The first commit binds the trap to the active modal, so the specs on this branch scan the whole page.

What approach did you choose and why?

Axe assertions sit in the existing feature specs for each page, so the pages render with the realistic data already set up there. A crawl-based sweep over demo data with a known-violations registry is a separate follow-up, SE-712; this PR stays per-page.

The focus trap fix leaves the overlay's role="dialog" markup unchanged; it is display: none while idle, so assistive tech never reaches it. Only the always-visible anchors needed to stop being tabbable. The nine axe specs written before this PR keep their #content scoping until SE-711 drops it.

AI involvement

Collaborative – AI generated a substantial part of the code; I reviewed and understand every line.

Merge checklist

• Added/updated tests
• Added/updated documentation in Lookbook (patterns, previews, etc)
• Tested major browsers (Chrome, Firefox, Edge, ...)

[github-actions]

Warning

Flaky specs

• rspec ./spec/features/admin/departments_spec.rb[1:2:3]
• rspec ./spec/features/work_packages/automations/automations_spec.rb[1:6:1]

🤖 Ask Copilot to investigate

Copy the prompt below into a new comment on this PR to delegate the investigation to GitHub Copilot. It will look into the flakiness and open a separate pull request with you as reviewer.

@copilot The following spec(s) are flaky in CI (first seen on PR #25846, linked for reference only):

- `rspec ./spec/features/admin/departments_spec.rb[1:2:3]`
- `rspec ./spec/features/work_packages/automations/automations_spec.rb[1:6:1]`

Treat this as a standalone task, unrelated to PR #25846. Create a new branch from origin/dev and open a new pull request targeting dev — do not stack it on PR #25846 or reuse that branch.

Follow the playbook in docs/development/testing/handling-flaky-tests/README.md to find the root cause and fix the underlying race — do not skip, delete, or weaken the spec to make it pass; disabling is a last resort per the playbook, and only with a bug ticket. Verify the fix by running the spec(s) repeatedly (e.g. `script/bulk_run_rspec --run-count 10`).

If you cannot reproduce the flake or are not confident in a fix after reasonable investigation, do not fabricate a change or skip the spec to force CI green. Instead, leave the pull request in draft and document what you tried, the suspected cause, and any leads in its description, then assign @myabc to take over.

Once the fix is verified, title the PR after the spec(s) it fixes, and use the PR description to explain the root cause, how the change resolves it, and the before/after results. Label the PR `flaky-spec`, assign @myabc, and request a review from @myabc.
On every commit, set @myabc as the sole co-author with a `Co-authored-by:` trailer (use their GitHub no-reply email so it links to their account), so it is traceable who dispatched the fix.