Re: GitHub issue on checkbox and radio button labels

Andrew,
Your example  is a certain "pass" but the one below may not  be so clear:
If non-PD visible label is "Phone number (10 digits)" but title /
aria-label is "Phone number", or
non-PD visible label is "First name" and title or aria-label is "Name"

Maybe a failure technique needs to be added to demonstrate  such situations?
Best regards,
Sailesh Panchang


On 11/20/15, Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com> wrote:
> So, just as an actual example, here’s one possible bit of code that one
> might encounter:
>
> <p>What is your favorite color?</p>
> <input type="radio” name=“aa” value=“a1” title="What is your favorite
> color?: Red"> Red<br>
> <input type="radio” name=“aa” value=“a2” title="What is your favorite
> color?: Blue"> Blue<br>
> …
>
> And yes, one would be better off doing this, but we aren’t talking about
> what is better, we are talking about what is sufficient to meet the standard
> we have today, whether we like the standard or don't:
> <fieldset><legend>What is your favorite color?</legend>
> <label><input type="radio" value="a1"> Red</label>
> <label><input type="radio" value="a2"> Blue</label>
> ...
> </fieldset>
>
> What do people think, does the first, less-well coded example pass 1.3.1?
>
> Thanks,
> AWK
>
> Andrew Kirkpatrick
> Group Product Manager, Accessibility
> Adobe
>
> akirkpat@adobe.com
> http://twitter.com/awkawk
> http://blogs.adobe.com/accessibility
>
> From: CAE-Vanderhe
> Date: Thursday, November 19, 2015 at 20:21
> To: Jonathan Avila
> Cc: John Foliot, "paul.adam@deque.com<mailto:paul.adam@deque.com>", Andrew
> Kirkpatrick, WCAG
> Subject: Re: GitHub issue on checkbox and radio button labels
>
> Sorry to be cryptic
>
> by  “relationship between the label and the control…”  I just meant that
> this label went with that control.
>
> and yes - accessible names (if they are different than the visible names)
> should have the same meaning.
>
> Gregg
>
>
>
> On Nov 19, 2015, at 3:30 PM, Jonathan Avila
> <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com<mailto:jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com>> wrote:
>
>>  the requirement is not that it be programmatically connected — but that
>> the relationship between the label and the control be programmatically
>> determinable if it can be visually determinable (for example).
>
> Gregg, I agree with you on the programmatically connected statement,
> however, I would very much like to get more information from you on what
> “relationship between the label and the control...” means.  Does this mean
> the programmatic name must match – what criteria can we use to be sure the
> relationship is there other than the label text and the accessible name are
> similar or mean the same thing, and include all relevant details such as
> required state, etc.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Jonathan
>
> --
> Jonathan Avila
> Chief Accessibility Officer
> SSB BART Group
> jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com<mailto:jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com>
>
> 703-637-8957 (o)
> Follow us: Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/#%21/ssbbartgroup> |
> Twitter<http://twitter.com/#%21/SSBBARTGroup> |
> LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/company/355266?trk=tyah> |
> Blog<http://www.ssbbartgroup.com/blog> | Newsletter<http://eepurl.com/O5DP>
>
> From: Gregg Vanderheiden [mailto:gregg@raisingthefloor.org]
> Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2015 1:49 PM
> To: John Foliot
> Cc: Paul Adam; Jonathan Avila; Andrew Kirkpatrick; GLWAI Guidelines WG org
> Subject: Re: GitHub issue on checkbox and radio button labels
>
> correct
> the requirement is not that it be programmatically connected — but that the
> relationship between the label and the control be programmatically
> determinable if it can be visually determinable (for example).
>
> g
>
>
>
> On Nov 19, 2015, at 1:36 PM, John Foliot
> <john.foliot@deque.com<mailto:john.foliot@deque.com>> wrote:
>
> Paul Adam wrote:
>>
>> 1.3.1 Info and Relationships: Information, structure, and relationships
>> conveyed through presentation can be programmatically determined or are
>> available in text. (Level A)
>>
>> Is there a definition in WCAG for the term "or are available in text.”
>>
>> So a title attribute can create not just an accessible name 4.1.2 but also
>> a relationship connection 1.3.1? I could see the argument for
>> aria-labelledby as that’s an association but aria-label or title are not
>> connecting anything programmatically to the input.
>
>
> I think WCAG’s non-normative text is fairly clear here:
>
> From Understanding SC 1.3.1 - Examples of Success Criterion 1.3.1
> (
> http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/content-structure-separation-programmatic.html#content-structure-separation-programmatic-examples-head)
>
> A form where the labels for the checkboxes can be programmatically
> determined:
>                In a form, the labels for each checkbox can be
> programmatically determined by assistive technology.
> [JF: AT no time does SC 1.3.1 speak to “association” nor “connection” –
> simply AND EXCLUSIVELY programmatic determination]
>
> And then from Understanding SC 1.3.1 - Key Terms:
> (http://www.w3.org/TR/UNDERSTANDING-WCAG20/content-structure-separation-programmatic.html#key-terms)
>
> programmatically determined (programmatically determinable)
>
>     determined by software from author-supplied data provided in a way that
> different user agents, including assistive technologies, can extract and
> present this information to users in different modalities
>
>     Example 1: Determined in a markup language from elements and attributes
> that are accessed directly by commonly available assistive technology.
>
> [JF: <label> is an element, aria is a collection of attributes. My read here
> is that either is acceptable, as long as they are ”accessed directly by
> commonly available assistive technology”. This is achieved via the
> Accessibility APIs where the Accessible Name is programmatically associated
> to the form input, and can then subsequently be programmatically
> determined.]
>
>
> Next, go here:
> http://www.w3.org/TR/html-aam-1.0/#accessible-name-and-description-calculation
> (Mapping form inputs)
> HTML Accessibility API Mappings 1.0
> 5.5 Other Form Elements
> Other Form Elements Accessible Name Calculation (This includes checkbox and
> radio button)
>
>   1.  Use aria-labelledby
>   2.  Otherwise use aria-label
>   3.  Otherwise use label element
>   4.  Otherwise use title attribute
>   5.  If none of the above yield a usable text string there is no accessible
> name
>
>
> [JF: Translation: The various Accessibility APIs will try to determine the
> “Accessible Name” of a form input using the above 5 listed solutions, IN
> THAT ORDER. Once the Accessible Name has been determined, the processing
> stops. This then establishes the ‘relationship’ to the Accessibility API,
> and binds it “programmatically” - and subsequently meeting the WCAG
> requirement. “
>
> In practice, using the title attribute is not a great idea, as many AT’s
> have elected to ignore that under most circumstances – the exception being
> when used in Forms. Even then, the combined specs agree that @title is the
> last resort:
> “…with HTML title attribute having the lowest precedence…”
>
>
>
> What Paul appears to be arguing for is better *usability*, and I think that
> none of us would disagree that improved usability is a worthwhile goal. But
> from my years of working with WCAG 2 I’ve never actually seen a Success
> Criteria mandate a specific behavior or even user pattern – in actual fact
> it seems that this was studiously avoided. This is also one of the reasons
> why many of the Success Criteria have multiple Techniques.
>
> Based on this, I would suggest the following:
>
> For best Usability, use the <label> element with your checkboxes, as it will
> make the associated (programmatically determinable) Accessible name also
> “interactive” (in that you can click on it with a mouse… if of course you
> are using a mouse). I’ll note here as well that all form inputs
> automatically are in the document’s tab-order, so *another* way of placing
> focus on a checkbox would be to tab to it (but again, WCAG doesn’t mandate
> that behavior either).
>
> For determining conformance to WCAG however, any of the four options noted
> above - use aria-labelledby, otherwise use aria-label, otherwise use label
> element, or use title attribute - will meet the Success Criteria’s
> requirement for “…labels for each checkbox can be programmatically
> determined by assistive technology.”
>
> JF
>
>

Received on Friday, 20 November 2015 15:42:32 UTC