[bsatarnejad]

Ticket

https://community.openproject.org/wp/DREAM-882

What are you trying to accomplish?

Adds an accessible description to the backlog burndown chart so screen-reader users can understand its purpose and data without relying on the visual presentation.

[github-actions]

Warning

Flaky specs

• rspec ./spec/features/projects/creation_wizard/wizard_from_template_flow_spec.rb[1:1]
• rspec ./spec/features/roles/report_spec.rb[1:1]
• rspec ./spec/features/roles/report_spec.rb[1:2]
• rspec ./spec/features/roles/report_spec.rb[1:3]

🤖 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 #25745, linked for reference only):

- `rspec ./spec/features/projects/creation_wizard/wizard_from_template_flow_spec.rb[1:1]`
- `rspec ./spec/features/roles/report_spec.rb[1:1]`
- `rspec ./spec/features/roles/report_spec.rb[1:2]`
- `rspec ./spec/features/roles/report_spec.rb[1:3]`

Treat this as a standalone task, unrelated to PR #25745. Create a new branch from origin/dev and open a new pull request targeting dev — do not stack it on PR #25745 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 @bsatarnejad 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 @bsatarnejad, and request a review from @bsatarnejad.
On every commit, set @bsatarnejad 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.

[planktonic]

So good to make the charts more accessible! It could be great to add a follow up ticket to make the fallback content a <table> element, for the more complex/larger charts, what do you think?

(I don’t have the permissions to approve PRs here, so this is just a comment :))

[planktonic]

Is there a reason to render the chartDescription twice? The fallback content inside the canvas element is needed, but I don’t know if it’s useful to repeat it in an aria-description.

[bsatarnejad]

Good point! It is not needed to repeat it.

[bsatarnejad]

So good to make the charts more accessible! It could be great to add a follow up ticket to make the fallback content a <table> element, for the more complex/larger charts, what do you think?

(I don’t have the permissions to approve PRs here, so this is just a comment :))

Yes, I agree. A table would make larger charts easier to navigate and compare. I will create a follow-up ticket 👍🏼

[planktonic]

Looks great ✨