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

There are two scenarios here:
Scenario 1:
a. The mandatory nature of the field is  visually available next to  the field or its label (astterisk, "-required" text or the like):
This may be included within the label along with the field's text label or  by using required / aria-required. This essentially meets SC 1.3.1.
Often it is convenient to include the visible asterisk or "- required" like text  within the label  and thereby  make it PD.
Failing to associate such a visual cue  only leads to a failure of 1.3.1 at best and not 3.3.2 I believe.

b. There is an instruction before the form like "all fields are mandatory  unless indicated as optional".
This then is not associated with individual fields and it is not practical to do so. 

Scenario 2:
There is no visual cue or instruction to incicate that certain fields are mandatory.  

Today, SC 3.3.2 only requires a label or instruction. Refer: the first sentence under intent of the understanding doc. So a label that says "Name" when it should have been "First name" still passes 3.3.2 but may fail 2.4.6. (The next field may correctly have "Last name" as its label).   
When mandatory nature of fields or  format requirements are  not available to any user group, everyone is disadvantaged.
Everyone has to navigate through the form again and re-submit the form. The manner in which  SC 3.3.1 and 3.3.3 are met is significant here and can make a difference.

So, requiring the mandatory nature of some fields or data format instructions be included  as part of the label text or as a visual cue  can be added as a future SC 3.3.2 extension requirement. But this may violate content author's freedom.
When there is no visual cue, merely adding aria-required=true will only help one group of users and not users with cognitive impairments.

Finally: something documented for a technique should not be interpreted to  extend the requirement of a WCAG 2.0 SC. 
Thanks,
Sailesh

Received on Thursday, 11 February 2016 13:00:32 UTC