Re: Should G83: "Providing text descriptions to identify required fields that were not completed" reference 3.3.2?

I'd be one of those people that would:

 "argue that not indicating required fields was a bigger obstacle to people with cognitive disabilities and making changes to a form after submitting could be more problematic and knowing which fields required content in advance would reduce the burden on users with cognitive disabilities by not making them fill out fields they didn’t have to fill out."

Mike

Sent using CloudMagic Email<https://cloudmagic.com/k/d/mailapp?ct=pi&cv=7.4.8&pv=9.0.2&source=email_footer_2>

On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 5:41 pm, Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com> wrote:

Ø  Sometimes the application does not know if a field is required until it is submitted. If this behaviour is the same for all users - and the error messaging is happening in an accessible manner why would this be an accessibility issue?
I didn’t say it was an accessibility issue – but that we needed a resolution, i.e. an official response from the WCAG WG on this subject because it has come up enough to warrant discussion.  I agree with your example and I’ve also seen examples where all fields are required except when optional.  On the flip side people might argue that not indicating required fields was a bigger obstacle to people with cognitive disabilities and making changes to a form after submitting could be more problematic and knowing which fields required content in advance would reduce the burden on users with cognitive disabilities by not making them fill out fields they didn’t have to fill out.

Jonathan

Jonathan Avila
Chief Accessibility Officer
SSB BART Group
jon.avila@ssbbartgroup.com
703.637.8957 (o)
Follow us: Facebook<http://www.facebook.com/#!/ssbbartgroup> | Twitter<http://twitter.com/#!/SSBBARTGroup> | LinkedIn<http://www.linkedin.com/company/355266?trk=tyah> | Blog<http://www.ssbbartgroup.com/blog> | Newsletter<http://eepurl.com/O5DP>

From: James Nurthen [mailto:james.nurthen@oracle.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2016 12:33 PM
To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: Re: Should G83: "Providing text descriptions to identify required fields that were not completed" reference 3.3.2?

Sometimes the application does not know if a field is required until it is submitted. If this behaviour is the same for all users - and the error messaging is happening in an accessible manner why would this be an accessibility issue?

regards,
James
On 2/10/2016 9:03 AM, Jonathan Avila wrote:

Sailesh, I agree we need a resolution on this.  Right now this association indicates that you can comply with the required field indication visually and programmatically only appearing after submitting a form.  That is a page with required fields does not need to indicate them to conform to WCAG except on error then the required field state would need to be indicated visually/programmatically.



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 | Twitter | LinkedIn | Blog | Newsletter



-----Original Message-----

From: Sailesh Panchang [mailto:sailesh.panchang@deque.com]

Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2016 11:45 AM

To: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>

Subject: Should G83: "Providing text descriptions to identify required fields that were not completed" reference 3.3.2?



SC 3.3.2 is listed as the third applicable SC for this technique.

In example #3 the error text displayed after form submission is associated using the LABEL element. So this really  is a method of meeting 1.3.1 ... not 3.3.2.

The label, "First name" still remains the label that conveys the purpose of the field that satisfies 3.3.2.

Associating an asterisk or "- mandatory" or "-optional" or error text as part of the LABEL element is a method of meeting 1.3.1. Refer ARIA2 for instance.

So my recommendation is that  "SC 3.3.2" should be deleted from list of applicable SCs of G83. It is alright to retain the example though because it clarifies how 3.3.1 and 3.3.3 are met.

Thanks,

Sailesh Panchang



--
Regards, James

[Oracle]<http://www.oracle.com>
James Nurthen | Principal Engineer, Accessibility
Phone: +1 650 506 6781<tel:+1%20650%20506%206781> | Mobile: +1 415 987 1918<tel:+1%20415%20987%201918> | Video: james.nurthen@oracle.com<mailto:james.nurthen@oracle.com>
Oracle Corporate Architecture
500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood Cty, CA 94065
[Green             Oracle]<http://www.oracle.com/commitment>Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment