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 11:58:35 -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: <11D3A054-6841-4A78-9F6C-3D5676F5B104@gmail.com>
To: Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com>
I see. So that can be done in a number of ways:

- A live region with an aria-describedby that points to it from the control. Content would be triggered upon focus change. ( I like this as it can be changed and the user is guaranteed to be notified)
- A confirmation popup when a form is submitted. There may be multiple form elements that require a notification to the user. 

Rich

> On Feb 3, 2016, at 11:28 AM, Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com> wrote:
> 
> I understand this in most cases, and if the group decides this is the best way to go, that's fine with me.
> 
> However I do need to explain the situation, because the circumstance I'm referring to was more unique, in that the client is a financial institution that was sued because it did not adiquatly convey to non-sighted screen reader users that the checking of a particular checkbox would significantly impact there accounts, even though this was conveyed visually using CSS for sighted users.
> 
> So the legal design requirements were then mandated that it must convey that something else was going to happen when this checkbox was checked.
> 
> As I said, if the group decides this association is not important, I'll refer them to this thread in the future to explain why.
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Schwerdtfeger [mailto:richschwer@gmail.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2016 9:06 AM
> To: Bryan Garaventa <bryan.garaventa@ssbbartgroup.com>
> Cc: Stefan Schnabel <stefan.schnabel@sap.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?
> 
> 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 17:59:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 20:23:19 UTC