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

Is 1.3.6 underrated?

From: Bailey, Bruce <Bruce.Bailey@ed.gov>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 13:12:05 -0500
Message-ID: <CCDBDCBFA650F74AA88830D4BACDBAB50B2D4A6A@wdcrobe2m02.ed.gov>
To: "Guide Lines list" <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>

I believe sc 1.3.6 should be level 1.

Section 508 1194.21(l) and 1194.22(n) have good (and nearly identical) language for specifying what constitute accessible forms:
<blockquote>
...the form shall allow people using assistive technology to access the information, field elements, and functionality required for completion and submission of the form, including all directions and cues. 
</blockquote>

Using Jim's mapping <http://jimthatcher.com/508wcag2.htm> with which I can find no fault, the above corresponds to WCAG 2.0 success criteria 1.3.6 and 4.2.4.
<blockquote>
1.3.6.  Information required to understand and operate content does not rely on shape, size, visual location, or orientation of components.  [Level 3]
4.2.4.  The label of each user interface control that accepts input from the user can be programmatically determined and is explicitly associated with the control.
</blockquote>

My concern here is that 1.3.6 is only level 3, yet 4.2.4 alone seems insufficient to the task of assuring that form controls are accessible.  This is compounded by the fact that one preferred technique, as Jim points outs, involves merely using the title attribute.  Since title is invisible, this sc doesn't warrant being lowered because of that concern.
Received on Wednesday, 14 December 2005 18:12:12 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:47:41 GMT