- From: Michael Gower <michael.gower@ca.ibm.com>
- Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2017 06:36:44 -0800
- To: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
- Cc: John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com>, "lisa.seeman" <lisa.seeman@zoho.com>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <OF1D8E3146.11DACE26-ON882581FD.005000CC-882581FD.005043DC@notes.na.collabserv.c>
I think you have to have "identification number" in there somewhere. There are a ton of processes in every enterprise I've worked in, as well as government, that require me to enter an employee ID or SIN as my primary identifier. Most banks use a bank card number as a determinant in a 2-factor process. Michael Gower IBM Accessibility Research 1803 Douglas Street, Victoria, BC V8T 5C3 gowerm@ca.ibm.com voice: (250) 220-1146 * cel: (250) 661-0098 * fax: (250) 220-8034 From: Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com> To: "lisa.seeman" <lisa.seeman@zoho.com> Cc: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>, John Foliot <john.foliot@deque.com> Date: 2017-12-21 04:18 AM Subject: Re: some questions: : working on re-authentication Hi Lisa, (John – question for you below.) For this: - authentication process can rely on the user or user-agent entering personal identification information such as name, username, password, and email address if the web content consistently supports automatic entry. > Automatic entry of user information can not work because autocomplete and the name is not set . It is not quite blocking the user agent rather they are not supported. If the username/password (or other) inputs pass 1.3.1. (info & relationships) and 4.1.2 (role/name/value) then user-agents currently support automatic entry unless the site actively blocks it. Also, there would also be overlap with the new SC that requires the autofill attributes, which I think includes username and current-password? (JF – have they been kept in the list?) Therefore, I would like to revert that change to avoid overlap with other SCs. > Also if transcribe follows the dictionary definition we can just clarify what we mean in the understanding section. Is that Ok? I think that would be best. Cheers, -Alastair
Received on Thursday, 21 December 2017 14:37:26 UTC