W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-aria@w3.org > February 2016

Re: Why is aria-expanded invalid with a checkbox?

From: Richard Schwerdtfeger <richschwer@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 11:06:25 -0600
Cc: Stefan Schnabel <stefan.schnabel@sap.com>, Birkir Gunnarsson <birkir.gunnarsson@deque.com>, James Nurthen <james.nurthen@oracle.com>, "public-aria@w3.org" <public-aria@w3.org>
Message-Id: <3DEABAED-4D71-4A72-9D2D-CBA2BDB46162@gmail.com>
To: Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com>
In this case even the sighted user does not know that is what is going to happen. This is just a confirmation. There is no reason to have to indicate that it has a popup. 

So, what happens:

a dialog gets generated
an AT gets notified that a dialog was generated
Focus moves to the dialog box. The AT reads the dialog and the description if coded right. 

This is far different from a drop down menu where you have a button with a drop down that you need to operate to make a choice. The user will have a visual indication that the button has a dropdown (like a visible down arrow). That is not the case with a confirmation dialog. 

… sorry, no reason to have a popup on that. 

Rich

> On Feb 3, 2016, at 10:46 AM, Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com> wrote:
> 
> A devil's advocate question, what happens if you have a checkbox that when checked, opens a confirmation dialog?
> 
> This is a real world example, for a legal requirement of a client, where checking the checkbox involved important ramifications that needed to be conveyed to the user.
> 
> Technically the two actions are separate, the checking of the checkbox, which is either true or false, and the expantion of a content layer that must be associated to convey the importance of understanding this action.
> 
> How should these be linked? The use of aria-controls is not reliable, aria-owns is not valid.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rich Schwerdtfeger [mailto:richschwer@gmail.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2016 4:01 AM
> To: Schnabel, Stefan <stefan.schnabel@sap.com>
> Cc: Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com>; Birkir Gunnarsson <birkir.gunnarsson@deque.com>; James Nurthen <james.nurthen@oracle.com>; public-aria@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Why is aria-expanded invalid with a checkbox?
> 
> No way would I want an expandable checkbox. It should fail a validator.
> 
> Browsers let things like this pass because it is too expensive to correct every possible poorly coded web page. They need to try to be performant. This is a validator issue.
> 
> Rich
> 
> Sent from my iPad
> 
>> On Feb 3, 2016, at 1:42 AM, Schnabel, Stefan <stefan.schnabel@sap.com> wrote:
>> 
>> To be used in which pattern? Collapse/Expand of regions?
>> 
>> Regards
>> Stefan
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Bryan Garaventa [mailto:bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com]
>> Sent: Mittwoch, 3. Februar 2016 00:39
>> To: Birkir Gunnarsson <birkir.gunnarsson@deque.com>; James Nurthen 
>> <james.nurthen@oracle.com>
>> Cc: public-aria@w3.org
>> Subject: RE: Why is aria-expanded invalid with a checkbox?
>> 
>> I vote we just add this role to the spec, it already works.
>> 
>> E.G
>> 
>> <input type="checkbox" aria-expanded="true" title="Test" />
>> 
>> This already sets the 'expanded' state in IE11, Firefox, and Chrome in the accessibility tree.
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Birkir Gunnarsson [mailto:birkir.gunnarsson@deque.com]
>> Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2016 3:27 PM
>> To: James Nurthen <james.nurthen@oracle.com>
>> Cc: public-aria@w3.org
>> Subject: Re: Why is aria-expanded invalid with a checkbox?
>> 
>> As a screen reader, if I move to a checkbox and hear:
>> "I hold a non immigrant visa, checkbox not checked collapsed"
>> (<input type="checkbox" aria-expanded="false" aria-controls="niv"> 
>> <div role="region" aria-label="None Immigrant Visa information" 
>> id="niv">
>> 
>> ...
>> </div>
>> 
>> I would know that checking that checkbox will cause additional content to appear.
>> 
>> You are right that aria-controls hints at the same thing, but it is not necessarily tied to the display of a section of content.
>> It could be a submit button that becomes enabled only after I check the checkbox.
>> It could also be a section that is already visible on the page but checking the checkbox automatically changes default UI element settings.
>> 
>> the use of aria-expanded would clearly tell me that a section of the page will be expanded or collapsed as a result of me interacting with the checkbox, the non-visual equivalent of seeing content appear and disappear.
>> 
>> I am just perplexed why aria-expanded is allowed on so many roles, (I have some difficulty seeing the use cases for some of them), but not on a check box.
>> Cheers
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On 2/2/16, James Nurthen <james.nurthen@oracle.com> wrote:
>>> I'd have thought that checked in combination with aria-controls was 
>>> enough here.
>>> Unless the checked and expanded state can be different (which I don't 
>>> believe they could be) I would just use checked and aria-controls.
>>> 
>>>> On 2/2/2016 2:58 PM, Birkir Gunnarsson wrote:
>>>> Oh wise ones.
>>>> 
>>>> I am working with a team that is implementing a form where checking 
>>>> a check box expands a section further down the page.
>>>> They actually thought of putting aria-expanded and aria-controls on 
>>>> the check box to communicate this info to assistive technologies.
>>>> I had to stop the because checkbox role is not one of the 40 or so 
>>>> roles that allow the aria-expanded property.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> I find this curious.
>>>> The situation I described, where sections of a dynamic form or 
>>>> webpage are displayed or hidden in response to user checking or 
>>>> unchecking a check box is quite common.
>>>> Sure, if the section of the page is, in content order, after the 
>>>> checkbox that controls it, users do not necessarily need to be aware 
>>>> of the change, but it is a very smart usability decision to inform 
>>>> the user that checking a checkbox affects contents elsewhere on the 
>>>> webpage.
>>>> My questions are:
>>>> 1. Why was aria-expanded not considered a valid attribute with check 
>>>> boxes and, 2. Can this case be revisited? If so I'd be happy to 
>>>> create an issue ticket if necessary.
>>>> Thanks
>>>> -Birkir
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Regards, James
>>> 
>>> Oracle <http://www.oracle.com>
>>> James Nurthen | Principal Engineer, Accessibility
>>> Phone: +1 650 506 6781 <tel:+1%20650%20506%206781> | Mobile: +1 415
>>> 987
>>> 1918 <tel:+1%20415%20987%201918> | Video: james.nurthen@oracle.com 
>>> <sip:james.nurthen@oracle.com> Oracle Corporate Architecture
>>> 500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood Cty, CA 94065 Green Oracle 
>>> <http://www.oracle.com/commitment> Oracle is committed to developing 
>>> practices and products that help protect the environment
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Birkir R. Gunnarsson
>> Senior Accessibility Subject Matter Expert | Deque Systems
>> 2121 Cooperative Way, Suite 210
>> Herndon, VA, 20171
>> 
>> Ph: (919) 607-27 53
>> Twitter: @birkir_gun
>> 
Received on Wednesday, 3 February 2016 17:06:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 18:58:20 UTC