W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > October to December 2014

Re: lc-2954

From: Joshue O Connor <joshue.oconnor@cfit.ie>
Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2014 13:47:53 +0100
Message-ID: <542BF7F9.50308@cfit.ie>
To: Adam Solomon <adam.solomon2@gmail.com>
CC: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, James Nurthen <james.nurthen@oracle.com>
Adam Solomon wrote:
> Points raised in our discussion at the wcag group meeting on 300914, to be
> considered for the next group meeting:

Great, thanks for that Adam.


> -title attribute (and aria-label) could be used to succeed use cases where
> visible labels exists (i.e. set of phone number fields - see F82, or for
> that matter any time there is a visible label w/o programmatic
> determination, title could be used as a replacement and that might be
> considered programmatic determination because it provides the same info as
> the label). So, there is good reason to leave "title" and "aria-label" in
> this failure.
> -there is no failure for 4.1.2 in a case where there is no visible label
> and no programmatic label, i.e. in a case where there is a control with no
> label whatsoever (as can happen with a select where the items in the select
> list give the user an idea what to choose from). If the group feels that
> this is in fact a failure, then would it be possible to include such a
> failure of 4.1.2 in F68 (in which case we would need to split the test
> procedure between visible labels and cases where there is no label at all,
> and instances where only 4.1.2 is violated to instances where 1.3.1 is also
> violated). Or, is this use case not a failure at all, since all users are
> at the same disadvantage when no visible label is provided.
Received on Wednesday, 1 October 2014 12:48:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:34:16 UTC