Meaning of phrases: "described to the user " or "provided to the user"

Please refer to two SCs:
3.3.1 Error Identification: If an  input error  is automatically
detected, the item that is in error is identified and the error is
described to the user in text. (Level A)
3.3.3 Error Suggestion: If an  input error  is automatically detected
and suggestions for correction are known, then the suggestions are
provided to the user, unless it would jeopardize the security or
purpose of the content. (Level AA)

I have noted that the phrase, "described to the user " or "provided to
the user"  are not defined in WCAG 2.0.
So I interpret these to mean respectively:
- the identity of the failed field and  a description of why it failed
validation is available in text on the page
- a suggestion on how the error condition can be overcome is described
in text on the page

As an example, a text message, "Please enter the departure date in the
correct format: MM-DD-YYYY" placed, say, next to the field passes
3.3.1 and 3.3.3 in my interpretation of WCAG 2.0.
As the message may appear to be related to the field  by presentation,
I suppose SC 1.3.1 kicks in requiring programmatic association.
The presence of a global error message like, "Errors present, please
fix them and resubmit the form", or, in its absence, the field
specific message like the one above is in the nature of a notification
or an alert. It would be necessary to present it in a manner that it
really notifies the user.
In the Web 1.0 days, it would have typically been presented as a JS
alert or dialog. In today's Web world, it needs a suitable role i.e.
compliance with 4.1.2.

Surely, if programmatic association and  exposing proper role  to make
it work with user agents and AT is also being conveyed by the phrases
"described to the user " or "provided to the user", that is a very
specific connotation in the context of WCAG 2.0. I would then expect
these terms to have a normative definition. The extended meaning
cannot be explained away in the "Intent" which is not normative in my
opinion.
This discussion may also have a bearing for changes to WCAG 2.0 being
debated on.
I am eager to hear what others think .
Kind regards,
Sailesh Panchang

Received on Monday, 16 May 2016 15:26:12 UTC