Re: Aria-labelledby for form controls- examples

Sailesh,
Replies inline.
On 9/12/2013 9:16 AM, Sailesh Panchang wrote:
> Hello James,
> The third issue about the checkbox:
> Before the example, there is a paragraph which explains  why the checkbox needs a specific identifier.
> The 'check to compare' serves little or no purpose, I'd say even visually,  but it is part of the UI.
> But I'll reiterate as a VI user  that  It is text that can be safely be ignored by AT to avoid cluttering verbosity. So I believe the aria-labelledby markup is good as is.
> Agree?
JN: No I do not agree. You are not all VI users. Others have different 
opinions than yours. Indeed I created 3 testcases - your example, one 
using aria-labelledby to combine both "labels" and one using 
aria-labelledby and aria-describedby and asked a colleague which she 
preferred. The answer was
"I like the second link better because it's clear what the checkboxes 
are for. "

The second link was the following HTML

<form action="#" method="post" id="form9">

<h3 id="lap1">Gaming Laptop</h3>
<p>Text of laptop features</p>
<p><input type="checkbox" id="lbl1" aria-labelledby="lap1 id1"><label 
for="lbl1" id="id1">Check to compare</label></p>
<h3 id="lap2">Mini Laptop</h3>
<p>Text of laptop features </p>
<p><input type="checkbox" id="lbl2" aria-labelledby="lap2 id2"><label 
for="lbl2" id="id2">Check to compare</label></p>
<h3 id="lap3">Fully Featured Touchscreen Laptop</h3>
<p>Text of laptop features </p>
<p><input type="checkbox" id="lbl3" aria-labelledby="lap3 id3"><label 
for="lbl3" id="id3">Check to compare</label></p>
</form>

> Ref: http://mars.dequecloud.com/demo/form-markup.htm#tech9
>
> About role=group write-up:
> What I have already submitted is a specific technique for grouping related form controls generally usable when one is constrained by design to use fieldset-legend technique. So please review  / discuss and consider for incorporating into techniques.
> As I wrote it, it will be good if others can comment.
JN: In order to make edits I need to get this into the wiki. It requires 
edits (particularly to the test procedure) in order to be acceptable as 
a technique. I don't have time to do this at the moment and would invite 
you to do so and perhaps refine the test procedure so we can progress 
the technique.

regards,
James


> Also review other changes / comments :
> See
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wcag2-techs/2013May/
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wcag2-techs/2013Aug/0000.html
> Thanks,
> Sailesh
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Wed, 9/11/13, james nurthen <james.nurthen@oracle.com> wrote:
>
>   Subject: Re: Aria-labelledby for form controls- examples
>   To: "Sailesh Panchang" <spanchang02@yahoo.com>
>   Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
>   Date: Wednesday, September 11, 2013, 1:17 PM
>   
>   
>   On 9/11/2013 7:52 AM, Sailesh Panchang wrote:
>   >       On 9/10/2013
>   >   7:54 AM, Sailesh Panchang
>   >         wrote:
>   > Please review:
>   >   Aria-labelledby for form controls
>   >   http://mars.dequecloud.com/demo/form-markup.htm#tech5
>   >             JN:
>   I believe this is no different from http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/Using_aria-labelledby_to_concatenate_a_label_from_several_text_nodes#Example_2:_A_simple_data_table_with_text_inputs
>   >       Is there anything I am
>   missing that the example in the
>   >   current      technique
>   doesn't have?
>   >   Sailesh 09/11:
>   > The survey page for 'aria-labelledby for controls' had
>   no techniques. It was marked 'TDB'.
>   > That's why I sent these examples.
>   > If there  were examples already available, they
>   should have been on that survey page, no?
>   
>   JN 9/11:
>   This title of this technique is misleading and needs fixing.
>   This is an aria-labelledby technique intended at 1.1.1
>   As such labels for form fields are not appropriate. We have
>   other techniques for labeling form fields.
>   
>   >
>   >   http://mars.dequecloud.com/demo/form-markup.htm#tech7
>   >             JN:
>   We certainly need a role=group technique to cover
>   >   this use case.
>   >       Would someone like to
>   volunteer to write this?
>   > Sailesh 09/11:
>   > There's one already  submitted in May 2013.
>   > I had submitted a few techniques including one for the
>   role=group as an alternative for fieldset-legend
>   > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wcag2-techs/2013May/
>   > There's a problem with the technique submission form
>   which I had conveyed to Andrew and code had not got
>   submitted alright.
>   > So a Word doc was sent to Andrew with my recent
>   submissions / comments  a few weeks ago. See attached.
>   > A few times, I requested that these be reviewed.
>   JN 9/11: I haven't seen this and it certainly hasn't been
>   passed to the task force for consideration. When I get time
>   I will try to add this to the wiki so it can be worked a
>   little more by the TF (or you can do this yourself if you
>   want)
>   
>   
>   >
>      http://mars.dequecloud.com/demo/form-markup.htm#tech9
>   >             JN:
>   I think this example needs modification and then
>   >   could fit      nicely
>   into the Using        aria-labelledby to
>   concatencate multiple text nodes
>   >   case.
>   >   As it stands there is no indication to
>   AT that checking
>   >   the checkbox      does
>   a compare operation so the labelledby needs to
>   >   point to the header and the checkbox
>   label and not just the header.
>   > Sailesh 09/11:
>   > Well the aria-labelledby works fine for the checkbox
>   and conveys its purpose clearly.
>   JN 9/11: The label on its own could be to buy the item or
>   indeed any other usage. The label needs to include this. I
>   do not think the functionality of the checkbox is clear
>   without this.
>   > There is also an explicit label 'check to compare'
>   which is read when one arrows down (out of forms mode).
>   JN 9/11: I'm not sure we can rely on this - of we could our
>   lives would be much easier. How about a compromise where the
>   check to compare is the aria-descibedby reference?
>   > Certainly instruction that you can compare 2 or 4 items
>   will be conveyed somewhere at the start / end of the form.
>   JN 9/11: If this is the case then this should be in the
>   example.
>   > That does not  have to be conveyed by every
>   checkbox.
>   > Based on your argument, every form control's label
>   needs to convey which form it belongs to and what will be
>   accomplished by submitting the form.
>   JN 9/11: this is not an equivalent argument. The visually
>   associated label for the checkbox is "Check to compare". Not
>   providing this to AT is a clear violation of 1.3.1.
>   > i.e. on a login form the label for username will need
>   to convey that it will be submitted as part of the login
>   process.
>   > If every checkbox were to convey that once checked it
>   will be used for comparison,  that will be a lot of
>   verbosity and a lot of problem.
>   > When you have a list of emails displayed  on a Web
>   page, one can check them and delete or move or mark as spam
>   etc. The checkbox's label does not convey this.
>   JN 9/11: Here there is not a visually associated label. If
>   it is important for a sighted user to have the "check to
>   compare" text then this should be provided for a screen
>   reader user too. If this is not important then the text need
>   not be provided to anyone.
>   
>   Regards,
>   James
>   
>   
>   > Thanks and regards,
>   > Sailesh
>   >
>      Regards,
>   >         James
>   >
>              Secondly in
>   the matter of aria-labelledby for non text
>   >   content:
>   >   - The first example has no alt
>   >   - The second one: seldom  is
>   there text taht says '4 out
>   >   of 5' for *rating it is only the
>   image.
>   >   But, yes, the  example is a good
>   one if it is indeed marked
>   >   up that way with multiple star images
>   and text alongside.
>   >     About use of role=headings:
>   >   It appears it is more of a remediation
>   technique to be used
>   >   only when HTML h<n> cannot be
>   used like for h7 as
>   >   illustrated?
>   >   Need to think of more used cases I
>   guess.
>   >     Thanks,
>   >   Sailesh
>   
>   
>   
>

Received on Thursday, 12 September 2013 21:50:12 UTC