Re: Not hearing grouping labels for checkboxes, radio buttons and link lists.

I recommend a best practice of using aria-describedby to associate the
checkbox or radio with its context (heading above it) . This way it is read
at the end of the label so not too chatty

Cheers,
David MacDonald



*Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*
Tel:  613.235.4902

LinkedIn
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>

twitter.com/davidmacd

GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald>

www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/>



*  Adapting the web to all users*
*            Including those with disabilities*

If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy
<http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html>

On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 11:18 AM, Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
wrote:

> On 02/05/2016 14:33, ALAN SMITH wrote:
>
>> 2)To your statement that “Not all checkboxes/radio buttons *need* a
>> grouping label”  I would say that of the hundreds of  radio button and
>> checkbox sets/groups that I have seen they all “did need” this grouping
>> label to understand what is being asked of the user.
>>
>
> Starter for one: the various "I have read and accept the terms and
> conditions" type checkboxes in most shopping/purchasing workflows? The
> related "I would like you not to spam me to death / No don't put me on your
> perennial mailing list" radio buttons?
>
> Whether the there
>> is a lack of legend/fieldset or aria-describedby, or other means, if
>> some relationship is not there so that it is announced upon focus to the
>> items the automated tools should find and flag it. Or at least flag it
>> as something to manually checked.
>>
>
> Agree with that last part - tools should generally warn that they're not
> infallible.
>
> 3)I intentionally sent this to all on the chain as David had used the
>> words so eloquently “It was an information and relationship that was
>> visual but not perceivable to blind people except by exploring around
>> and guessing.” I wanted as much feedback as possible as this is an
>> important item that I see a gap in WCAG 2.0.
>>
>
> Sure, but when all the recipients are members of the mailing list, it
> results in doublers (e.g. for the lengthy "let's add a date" thread I've
> been consistently getting the same email twice since I fired off my first
> reply to the thread) :)
>
> P
>
> --
> Patrick H. Lauke
>
> www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
> http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com
> twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
>
>
>