Re: Is the <form> tag mandatory for 2.4.5?

+1

Cheers,
David MacDonald



*Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*
Tel:  613.235.4902

LinkedIn
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>

twitter.com/davidmacd

GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald>

www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/>



*  Adapting the web to all users*
*            Including those with disabilities*

If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy
<http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html>

On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 1:48 PM, Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>
wrote:

> Except that then you wind up with massive entanglement of issues. If you
> have a label missing on a field you might fail 2.4.5, or if you have alt
> missing on an input of type image for a search button you might fail 2.4.5.
>
> I would say that you can pass 2.4.5 by providing multiple ways (e.g.
> global navigation, sitemap, search) and users with disabilities of all
> sorts will be able to utilize the multiple ways if each way is correctly
> implemented. If the form for search is missing a label or has some other
> issue, some users will be affected but not all types, so the error should
> be identified for what it is – a missing label or whatever it is – and the
> page would then still pass 2.4.5 but have a 4.1.2/1.1.1/etc issue.
>
> AWK
>
> Andrew,
>
>
>
> I understand your point. If I can stretch my argument a bit, it would be
> that:
>
>
>
> 1.       I did not mean to imply multiple ways to navigate a page, but to
> locate pages/sought-for content.
>
> 2.       IF a search box as I described is presented as evidence of a way
> to meet 2.4.5, and
>
> 3.       IF the search box does not use <form> tags, which may impact
> screen reader identification,
>
> 4.       THEN an argument may be made that the search box does not fully
> meet the requirements for 2.4.5, at least on its own.
>
>
>
> *Andy Keyworth*
>
> Online Accessibility and Product Development Specialist
>
> Certified ADA Coordinator
>
> *T-Base Communications*
>
> Phone: 613-236-0866 *|* Toll free: 1-800-563-0668 x1256
>
> www.tbase.com*|* Ogdensburg, NY *|* Ottawa, ON
>
> For accessibility stories to inform & inspire, follow #tbasestories
> <http://tbase.com/blog-tags/t-base-stories>!
>
> *SIMPLIFYING ACCESSIBLE COMMUNICATIONS.TM*
>
>
>
> This email may contain information that is privileged and confidential.
> If you have received this communication in error, please delete this email
> message immediately.
>
>
>
> *From:* Andrew Kirkpatrick [mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com <akirkpat@adobe.com>]
>
> *Sent:* October-27-16 1:27 PM
> *To:* Andy Keyworth; WAI Interest Group
> *Cc:* Mohammad, Ashraf
> *Subject:* Re: Is the <form> tag mandatory?
>
>
>
> Andy,
>
> I would disagree that 2.4.5 applies to a form on a page since 2.4.5 reads:
>
>
>
> *Multiple Ways:* More than one way is available to locate a Web page
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/navigation-mechanisms-mult-loc.html#webpagedef> within
> a set of Web pages
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/navigation-mechanisms-mult-loc.html#set-of-web-pagesdef>except
> where the Web Page is the result of, or a step in, a process
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/navigation-mechanisms-mult-loc.html#processdef>.
> (Level AA)
>
>
>
> You seem to be describing the need for multiple ways to navigate a single
> page, but 2.4.5 only applies to the location of a page within a set.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> AWK
>
>
>
> Andrew Kirkpatrick
>
> Group Product Manager, Standards and Accessibility
>
> Adobe
>
>
>
> akirkpat@adobe.com
>
> http://twitter.com/awkawk
>
>
>
> *From: *Andy Keyworth <akeyworth@tbase.com>
> *Date: *Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 13:03
> *To: *WAI-IG <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
> *Cc: *"Mohammad, Ashraf" <Ashraf.Mohammad@sabre.com>
> *Subject: *RE: Is the <form> tag mandatory?
> *Resent-From: *WAI-IG <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
> *Resent-Date: *Thursday, October 27, 2016 at 13:04
>
>
>
> In auditing websites, I’ve noticed a real impact on screen reader
> usability when the <form>…</form> is absent. This has been most apparent on
> pages where there is a prominent form in the content which wraps using the
> “<form>” tags, but also a search box in the page header which does not do
> the same. In these cases, the search box function is noticeably less easy
> to find and use.
>
>
>
> I would argue this can have an impact on whether the site can claim to
> meet WCAG 2.0 Success Criterion 2.4.5, “Multiple Ways”.
>
>
>
> *Andy Keyworth*
>
> Online Accessibility and Product Development Specialist
>
> Certified ADA Coordinator
>
> *T-Base Communications*
>
> Phone: 613-236-0866 *|* Toll free: 1-800-563-0668 x1256
>
> www.tbase.com*|* Ogdensburg, NY *|* Ottawa, ON
>
> For accessibility stories to inform & inspire, follow #tbasestories
> <http://tbase.com/blog-tags/t-base-stories>!
>
> *SIMPLIFYING ACCESSIBLE COMMUNICATIONS.TM*
>
>
>
> This email may contain information that is privileged and confidential.
> If you have received this communication in error, please delete this email
> message immediately.
>
>
>
> *From:*chaals@yandex-team.ru [mailto:chaals@yandex-team.ru
> <chaals@yandex-team.ru>]
> *Sent:* October-27-16 12:44 PM
> *To:* Christophe Strobbe; Steve Faulkner
> *Cc:* WAI Interest Group
> *Subject:* Re: Is the <form> tag mandatory?
>
>
>
> Because you don't *need* a form tag to make it possible to fill in some
> input elements and send the data - assuming javascript is running properly,
> which is not always the case but happens most of the time.
>
>
>
> You can't work out what is in the particular form being submitted if you
> don't have a form tag, but then you have to have a specialised browser
> extension or a particularly friendly developer who made that possible or
> you can't do that anyway in practice.
>
>
>
> The point about the tags being mandatory is that if you want the DOM to
> record a form, you need both tags to go into the parser. Whereas for
> example you can leave out both the start and end tags for tbody or body and
> it will still create the elements…
>
>
>
>
>
> 27.10.2016, 18:37, "Christophe Strobbe" <strobbe@hdm-stuttgart.de>:
>
> Hi Steve,
>
> On 27/10/2016 17:56, Steve Faulkner wrote:
>
>
>
> On 27 October 2016 at 16:42, Christophe Strobbe <strobbe@hdm-stuttgart.de>
> wrote:
>
> According to the HTML5 specification, the both the start tag and the end
> tag of the form element are mandatory:
> <https://www.w3.org/TR/html5/forms.html#the-form-element>.
>
>
>
> Hi Christophe, they are not mandatory to use, but if you do have a start
> tag <form> you must have an end tag </form>
>
>
> How does that rhyme with the statement "Neither tag is omissible." in the
> HTML5.0 specification?
> (You can find the same statement about elements such as label, legend,
> textarea, header, footer, main, aside, section, nav and figure. For
> example, how would you know that something is a legend when there is
> neither a start tag nor an end tag?)
> The omission of tags follows certain rules: <https://www.w3.org/TR/html5/
> syntax.html#optional-tags>
> <https://www.w3.org/TR/html5/syntax.html#optional-tags>.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Christophe
>
>
>
>
>
> Ashraf, use of the form element is not a requirement for accessibility. If
> the interaction you have designed does not need a form element to function
> then that is fine.
>
>
> --
>
> Regards
>
> SteveF
>
> Current Standards Work @W3C
> <http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/2015/03/current-standards-work-at-w3c/>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Christophe Strobbe
>
> Akademischer Mitarbeiter
>
> Responsive Media Experience Research Group (REMEX)
>
> Hochschule der Medien
>
> Nobelstraße 10
>
> 70569 Stuttgart
>
> Tel. +49 711 8923 2749
>
>
>
> “I drink tea and I know things.”
>
> Falsely attributed to Christophe Lannister.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
> chaals@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.com
>
>
>