W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-ig@w3.org > April to June 2006

RE: Use of pre-compilated text-fields in forms

From: Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>
Date: Tue, 9 May 2006 10:18:42 -0700
Message-ID: <53744A0A1D995C459E975F971E17F56490C1C5@namail4.corp.adobe.com>
To: "David Poehlman" <david.poehlman@handsontechnologeyes.com>, <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>

For context, this was being discussed in 2000 with people questioning
what tools didn't support this.  6 years later, I'm prepared to let this
guideline go, especially since people are citing evidence that it causes
problems rather than solving them.  

AWK


> -----Original Message-----
> From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Kirkpatrick
> Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 1:05 PM
> To: David Poehlman; w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Use of pre-compilated text-fields in forms
> 
> 
> David,
> I can't think of any specific assistive technologies that 
> don't do this, but you said that you are thinking about 
> certain tools that don't support the identification of edit 
> fields or that require pre-filling the value to make the use 
> clear.  Can you name some of the tools you're thinking of?
> 
> Thanks,
> AWK 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org
> > [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of David Poehlman
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 7:23 AM
> > To: Alastair Campbell
> > Cc: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
> > Subject: Re: Use of pre-compilated text-fields in forms
> > 
> > 
> > sorry, message was sent beffore done.
> > 
> > It is my understanding that valid html at some level for 
> accessibility 
> > is to use text in the forms.  It's broader than a bbraille and not 
> > braille issue.  Now, if I could gett my user agent to mark 
> the fields 
> > with text for me so that my small screen would recognize or 
> my audio 
> > or braille output device, we could retire this checkpoint 
> with gusto.  
> > This gets complicated though and I'm thinking of the still rather 
> > large numbers of people using technology which simply does not 
> > recognize or report to the user an edit field.  Just because a user 
> > agent or user agent at combination or two does, does not mean the 
> > issue is solved.
> > 
> > On May 9, 2006, at 7:11 AM, Alastair Campbell wrote:
> > 
> > 
> > > Puting in an x or a word or two which if left in would return an 
> > > invalid entry message would be the solution.
> > 
> > So people enter 5x instead? (For example.)
> > 
> > I don't consider that a good solution, as people then have to go 
> > through the form again.
> > 
> > We have a conflict here of people using screen readers 
> versus people 
> > on Braille displays. (There are probably exceptions on both 
> sides, but 
> > in general there isn't a clear solution.)
> > 
> > When you have this, surely the best/easiest option for the general 
> > populace should win out? In that way even sites which have 
> no regard 
> > for accessibility aren't tripping up on this checkpoint, 
> and everyone 
> > is following the same (defacto) method.
> > 
> > I just don't see the advantage for anyone in catering for a 
> user agent 
> > that doesn't understand basic HTML.
> > 
> > Kind regards,
> > 
> > -Alastair
> > 
> > --
> > Alastair Campbell         |  Director of User Experience
> > 
> > Nomensa Email Disclaimer:
> > http://www.nomensa.com/email-disclaimer.html
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
Received on Tuesday, 9 May 2006 17:18:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 19 July 2011 18:14:24 GMT