[Bug 23265] New: Example 2.8 should we be concerned about a <label> without a "for"

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=23265

            Bug ID: 23265
           Summary: Example 2.8 should we be concerned about a <label>
                    without a "for"
           Product: HTML WG
           Version: unspecified
          Hardware: PC
                OS: Windows NT
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: Using ARIA in HTML
          Assignee: faulkner.steve@gmail.com
          Reporter: david100@sympatico.ca
        QA Contact: dave.null@w3.org
                CC: mike@w3.org, public-html-bugzilla@w3.org

Although the "for" attribute is not strictly required, almost every testing
tool for WCAG and accessibility will flag a missing "for"attribute as an error.
Should we be concerned about that?

Also wondering if we should remove the <p> paragraph before the supplementary
label text, given that most use cases for this technique would be forms with a
bit of extra label information directly below it.

Perhaps, we should also mention the benefits of the label for

Note: The use of the <label> element is included for a number of reasons. If
the user clicks on the text of the label element, the corresponding form field
will receive focus, which makes the clicking target larger for people with
dexterity problems. Also the <label> element will be included in the
accessibility tree. A span could have been used but if so, it should receive a
tabindex="-1" so that it will be included in the accessibility tree. It would
then lose the advantage of the larger clickable region.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.

Received on Tuesday, 17 September 2013 17:13:23 UTC