Re: GitHub issue on checkbox and radio button labels

Hi Andrew and all,

I agree, Andrew, that WCAG does not currently require checkboxes and
radio buttons to have labels which have a programmatic relationship to
the control itself that in turn enables the user to click on the label
to set focus to the control. It does not fail the letter of WCAG 2.0.

But in my IMHO it does fail accessibility.

Some people with disabilities need an increased clickable area. Does
it fail UAAG? If not, I wonder if the Low Vision Task Force should
consider this use case.

Kindest Regards,
Laura

On 11/19/15, Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com> wrote:
> I’ll start.  I don’t believe that this is required.
>
> A checkbox does need a name (4.1.2 – name, role, value) and that can be
> addressed with a label, title attribute, or aria attributes.
> A checkbox does need visible information that provides a label so people can
> see what the checkbox is for (3.3.2 – labels or instructions)
> 1.3.1 (info and relationships) is where it gets tricky and that is the basis
> of this question.
>
> 1.3.1<http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-WCAG20-20081211/#content-structure-separation-programmatic>
> Info and Relationships: Information,
> structure<http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/content-structure-separation-programmatic.html#structuredef>,
> and
> relationships<http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/content-structure-separation-programmatic.html#relationshipsdef>
> conveyed through
> presentation<http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/content-structure-separation-programmatic.html#presentationdef>
> can be programmatically
> determined<http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/content-structure-separation-programmatic.html#programmaticallydetermineddef>
> or are available in text.
>
> I do think that there is a relationship between the control and the label,
> and I do agree that using a label with for/id or wrapping the input element
> makes that programmatically determined.  I also think that one might choose
> to use aria-labelledby to make that relationship programmatically
> determinable (of course if the label is right next to the input then you are
> better off using the native support).
>
> If you use the title attribute, I believe that you are making the
> relationship available in text and that is sufficient to meet 1.3.1.
>
> I do agree that the ability to click or touch the label text to set focus to
> the control is valuable, but that seems like a user agent requirement to
> honor control labelling relationships with that functionality.
>
> What do others on the group think?
>
> Thanks,
> AWK
>
> Andrew Kirkpatrick
> Group Product Manager, Accessibility
> Adobe
>
> akirkpat@adobe.com
> http://twitter.com/awkawk
> http://blogs.adobe.com/accessibility
>
> From: Andrew Kirkpatrick
> Date: Thursday, November 19, 2015 at 11:36
> To: WCAG
> Subject: GitHub issue on checkbox and radio button labels
> Resent-From: WCAG
> Resent-Date: Thursday, November 19, 2015 at 11:37
>
> WCAGers,
> Paul Adam raised a question about whether WCAG 2.0 requires that checkboxes
> and radio buttons have labels which have a programmatic relationship to the
> control itself and therefore enable the user to click on the label to set
> focus to the control.
>
> https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/122
>
> Any thoughts?
>
> Thanks,
> AWK
>
> Andrew Kirkpatrick
> Group Product Manager, Accessibility
> Adobe
>
> akirkpat@adobe.com<mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com>
> http://twitter.com/awkawk
> http://blogs.adobe.com/accessibility
>


-- 
Laura L. Carlson

Received on Thursday, 19 November 2015 17:38:42 UTC