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

David,

I appreciate you feedback. 

I recommend something similar: 
A have them add a new label hidden off screen: “The heading above, grouping, 1 of x”
Then I use aria-describedby for this on the first item in group lists. So, upon focus to the first item, it will announce the displayed label (heading above the group), the word ‘grouping’, similar to how group works, and then that this is the first of the total number in the grouping.

Regards,

Alan

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

From: David MacDonald
Sent: Monday, May 2, 2016 1:16 PM
To: Patrick H. Lauke
Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: 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
 
CanAdapt Solutions Inc.
Tel:  613.235.4902
LinkedIn 

twitter.com/davidmacd
GitHub
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

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