Re: New SC: Meaningful element name

I would support the general direction.

It might fit in with the proposed failure of 1.3.1.
https://github.com/w3c/wcag/issues/173


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 Fri, Jul 15, 2016 at 12:41 PM, Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
wrote:

> On 15/07/2016 15:53, Sailesh Panchang wrote:
>
>> Proposed SC: Element name exposed to assistive technology is
>> meaningful and describes element's purpose.  Level AA
>>
>> This may be under Guideline 2.4
>>
>> Rationale:
>> Links are covered by 2.4.4, controls such as buttons by 1.1.1
>> But landmarks, region names  and such that are often named via
>> aria-label are not.
>> e.g. a main landmark with aria-label="Plan A Trip landmark, main
>> navigation".
>> or with aria-label text that runs together with no space between words.
>>
>> And the Understanding doc should suggest that the name should be
>> concise, clear, avoid redundant words etc.
>>
>
> I'd agree with this in principle.
>
> 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
>
>
>