Re: Possible wording for 1.3.4?

This SC seems to be saying that when using HTML input fields to collect 
user information, the input element needs to have the autocomplete 
attribute set with a value corresponding to the expected information 
(based on the tokens defined in HTML5.2). Is this right?



On 12/01/2018 14:47, Andrew Kirkpatrick wrote:
> OK, so here’s a new attempt at language for 1.3.4.
> 
> This language is below. Several concerns are addressed:
> 
>   * Uses a small and already-established list of values, based on the
>     values in HTML5.2, but only imposes those values on other
>     technologies if those technologies share the same values.
>   * Well-established browser support for input autofill, and provides a
>     pathway for cognitive AT innovation.
>   * Addresses a need established by the COGA group related to difficulty
>     filling out forms as well as providing the personalization
>     enhancements development pathway.
>   * WCAG doesn’t need to provide a specific list of inputs by
>     referencing the HTML list, but that list is versioned with HTML so
>     the level of testability doesn’t change until we update the
>     reference in WCAG 2.2 (or silver) to either an updated HTML or
>     COGA/ARIA spec.
>   * Specifically targeted to the user, so this isn’t for EVERY input
>     control, just a handful in the HTML spec (~40) that relate to common
>     user information (name, address, phone, credit card).
> 
> Title: Support Common Input Fields
> 
> SC Text:
> 
> In content implemented using technologies with support for autofilling 
> form inputs, the meaning of each user interface component that accepts 
> user input corresponding to the user can be programmatically determined; 
> inputs matching a meaning provided in the HTML 5.2 Autofill field names 
> <https://www.w3.org/TR/html52/sec-forms.html#autofill-field> must expose 
> that meaning except if the technology being used does not support a 
> corresponding autofill meaning.
> 
> Note:
> 
> The set of meanings for inputs is based on HTML 5.2. It is not expected 
> that every technology supports the same set, so content implemented 
> using a technology that supports a subset of the HTML 5.2 autofill 
> meanings is not required to provide support for meanings that are not 
> supported by that technology.
> 
> Note:
> 
> Some technologies are expected to provide a list of meanings that is a 
> superset of the HTML 5.2 set; authors are encouraged to implement 
> support for additional meanings in their content in order to provide a 
> better experience for users.
> 
> http://rawgit.com/w3c/wcag21/1.3.4_autofill/guidelines/index.html#identify-common-purpose
> 
> If you like it, or don’t like it, please speak up ASAP!
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> AWK
> 
> Andrew Kirkpatrick
> 
> Group Product Manager, Accessibility
> 
> Adobe
> 
> akirkpat@adobe.com
> 
> http://twitter.com/awkawk
> 

-- 
@LeonieWatson @tink@toot.cafe tink.uk carpe diem