W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2005

Re: [techs] Alt Text Tests 192 and 195

From: Chris Ridpath <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca>
Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2005 14:00:23 -0500
Message-ID: <025301c503d9$4a0e12b0$e29a968e@WILDDOG>
To: "Gregg Vanderheiden" <gv@trace.wisc.edu>, "'WAI WCAG List'" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>

> Test 192 "don't label your submit buttons as 'submit'" could be required
by:
> Guideline 1.1, Level 1, Success Criteria 1:
> For all non-text content that is functional, such as graphical links or
> buttons, text alternatives identify the purpose or function of the
non-text
> content.
>
> I don't follow your train of thought.  Having the alt text for a graphic
> "submit" button say "submit" sounds like identifying its purpose and
> function to me.    I think there might be plainer language that might be
> used - so there might be better alt text.  But I don't see how this alt
text
> would fail.
>
I'm not entirely sure that test 192 would be covered by Guideline 1.1, Level
1, Success Criteria 1 so that's why I'm bringing it up for discussion. I've
taken another look at the guidelines and it seems there might be a better
match for this test under Guideline 1.3, Level 1, SC1:
"Structures and relationships within the content can be programmatically
determined."
The general techniques document has a section related to this guideline on
properly identifying form controls:
http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-WCAG20-GENERAL-20041116/content-structure-separation-programmatic.html

So I believe that properly labeling a submit button is covered under the
current guidelines. The guidelines cover both the Alt text for images used
as submit buttons and the regular submit button text. Guideline creators -
is this right?

In the recent DRC report, blind users noted that "incorrect or non-existent
labeling of links, form elements and frames" was a "key problem". I'm not
able to view the raw data but I assume that "form elements" includes the
submit button. This leads me to believe that test 192 will be useful.

Labeling a submit button as "submit" adds nothing to the meaning of the
button. This is like using "alt text" as the alt text on your image or using
"link" as your link text. I think we can require that the author put in a
word or two that describes the purpose of the form submit button. It's not
unreasonable to ask that the author put in "search" or "find" instead of
"submit". I don't think this should be a level 1 requirement but would fit
with level 2.

> 1 - i only saw one test listed below so wasnt sure which two tests you
were
> referring to.
>

Test 195 "don't use source anchors starting with 'link to' or 'go to'" was
the other test. It also addresses the problem identified in the DRC report
regarding "incorrect or non-existent labeling of links...".

This test could map to guideline 3.1, level 3, SC 2 "Section headings and
link text are understandable...". Does that agree with you?

Cheers,
Chris










----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Gregg Vanderheiden" <gv@trace.wisc.edu>
To: "'Chris Ridpath'" <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca>; "'WAI WCAG List'"
<w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2005 11:20 PM
Subject: RE: [techs] Alt Text Tests 192 and 195


> Hi Chris
>
> 1 - i only saw one test listed below so wasnt sure which two tests you
were
> referring to.
>
> 2 - you wrote:
> Test 192 "don't label your submit buttons as 'submit'" could be required
by:
> Guideline 1.1, Level 1, Success Criteria 1:
> For all non-text content that is functional, such as graphical links or
> buttons, text alternatives identify the purpose or function of the
non-text
> content.
>
> I don't follow your train of thought.  Having the alt text for a graphic
> "submit" button say "submit" sounds like identifying its purpose and
> function to me.    I think there might be plainer language that might be
> used - so there might be better alt text.  But I don't see how this alt
text
> would fail.
>
>
>
>
> Gregg
>
>  -- ------------------------------ 
> Gregg C Vanderheiden Ph.D.
> Professor - Ind. Engr. & BioMed Engr.
> Director - Trace R & D Center
> University of Wisconsin-Madison
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Ridpath [mailto:chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2005 9:39 AM
> To: Gregg Vanderheiden; 'WAI WCAG List'
> Subject: Re: [techs] Alt Text Tests 192 and 195
>
> > 1 - We can't map techniques to success criteria unless the criteria
> > requires them.
> >
> I agree but both 2 tests could possibly be required by these success
> criteria:
>
> Guideline 1.1, Level 1, Success Criteria 4:
> Non-text content that does not provide information, functionality, or
> sensory experience is marked such that it can be ignored by assistive
> technology.
>
> Guideline 2.4, Level 2, Success Criteria 3:
> Blocks of repeated material, such as navigation menus and document
headers,
> are marked up so that they can be bypassed by people who use assistive
> technology or who navigate via keyboard or keyboard interface.
>
> Guideline 3.1, Level 3, Success Criteria 2:
> Section headings and link text are understandable when read by themselves
as
> a group (for example, in a screen reader's list of links or a table of
> contents).
>
> Test 192 "don't label your submit buttons as 'submit'" could be required
by:
> Guideline 1.1, Level 1, Success Criteria 1:
> For all non-text content that is functional, such as graphical links or
> buttons, text alternatives identify the purpose or function of the
non-text
> content.
>
> Could we get a clarification from the WCAG group - are these 2 tests are
> covered by the guidelines?
>
> > Maybe we should have a list of all techniques and a separate list of
> > just those that are approved for inclusion at this time.
> >
>
> The test suite status page shows which tests have been accepted by the
> group:
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/tests/checkstatus.html
>
> So far, there are only 10 tests accepted by the group. There are about 200
> tests proposed for the entire suite.
>
> Thanks for your comments.
>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 26 January 2005 19:01:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:35 GMT