- From: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
- Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 18:25:20 +0100
Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > 2) @alt > Pro: Presumably accessible to people with screen readers. Presumptions are risky. Is there any evidence (by which I mean a test case and a description of how to reproduce behavior with real user agents) that demonstrates that this would be true for INPUT TYPE="TEXT"? I can imagine screen readers resorting to checking ALT to repair missing LABEL and TITLE; I'd be surprised if it were common behavior otherwise. Likewise I can imagine users being able to query for ALT, but this hardly seems like a natural interface for accessing placeholder text. > 3) @title [snip] > Not accessible. There are various accessibility problems @title in existing environments and user agents: http://www.rnib.org.uk/wacblog/articles/too-much-accessibility/too-much-accessibility-title-attributes/ However, implementations could be improved, just as support for "placeholder" could be implemented. > 4) <label> (moving label textual content into <input> as placeholder > text; currently with Javascript to mutate the DOM, in the future with > CSS to present the desired appearance while keeping the DOM stable) > Pro: Most semantic. Is it? How is it /more/ semantic than "placeholder", which would precisely identify this text as a placeholder? -- Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
Received on Tuesday, 30 September 2008 10:25:20 UTC