W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > July to September 2013

Re: Aria-labelledby for form controls- examples

From: Sailesh Panchang <spanchang02@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 19:44:44 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <1379040284.59756.YahooMailBasic@web125001.mail.ne1.yahoo.com>
To: james nurthen <james.nurthen@oracle.com>
Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
James,
If the entire form is coded the way you did it, I too would vote  for it!
But it is hardly fair.
Apparently you missed the point that almost all example forms on that page are not complete.
They are partial forms that demonstrate a technique or a key point.
This form (including the one you coded in the email below)  too has no submit button at all!
In my last response, I Pointed to the text before the   form, and before that I said, there would be some instructions that  would clarify that one can compare  n products etc. placed at the start of the form.
On that page with form examples there is another example where aria-labelledby has 2 references. That is not the point of example #9. 
The point is: visually one can associate that checkbox 1 if for product 1 but a non-sighted user cannot make that association confidently.
So use aria-labelledby to identify the product. Surely if the need is to associate  3 other pieces of text with that checkbox using aria-labelledby, one can do that. 
Regards,
Sailesh

--------------------------------------------
On Thu, 9/12/13, 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: Thursday, September 12, 2013, 5:49 PM
 
 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 Friday, 13 September 2013 02:45:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 24 March 2022 21:07:54 UTC