- From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 06 Jul 2013 17:30:53 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=22586 --- Comment #12 from steve faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> --- (In reply to comment #11) > Oops, guess I haven't been paying attention then ;) OK, with that in mind > the code example with secondary label does make sense and could be > considered either conforming, or potentially a warning. > > As a pattern I'd also want to consider the case where that example had a > third bit of information to deal with, eg. explaining an error/invalid > state. Would you add to the description? Use an alert or status? > > From an author's point of view I do think I should mention I've rarely used > the "wrap label around control" pattern. It just isn't as flexible for > rendering and layout as separate elements linked with for. do you mean something like this? <label id="label1" for="f3">label text </label> <input type="text" id="f3" aria-labelledby="label1 label2 label3"> <p>other content</p> <label id="label2">more label text</label> <p>other content</p> <label id="label3">even more label text</label> note the flexibility of this technique is that that the labels can be associated with multiple controls: <label id="label1" for="f3">label text </label> <input type="text" id="f3" aria-labelledby="label1 label3"> <label id="label2" for="f4">label text </label> <input type="text" id="f4" aria-labelledby="label2 label3"> <p>other content</p> <!-- this label labels 2 controls --> <label id="label3">more label text</label> -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the QA Contact for the bug.
Received on Saturday, 6 July 2013 17:30:55 UTC