RE: Possible wording for 1.3.4?

I agree with Jason, and a version I've been working on is pretty darn 
close to where he was going:

For form input controls whose meaning is defined in a technology, user 
inputs corresponding to the user can have their meaning programmatically 
determined. 

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:   "White, Jason J" <jjwhite@ets.org>
To:     Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>, Marc Johlic 
<marc.johlic@gmail.com>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Date:   2018-01-12 09:57 AM
Subject:        RE: Possible wording for 1.3.4?



No, I think it’s testable in that it only applies to the field types 
supported by the technology being used.
 
From: Andrew Kirkpatrick [mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com] 
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2018 12:53 PM
To: White, Jason J <jjwhite@ets.org>; Marc Johlic <marc.johlic@gmail.com>; 
WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Possible wording for 1.3.4?
 
Jason,
My concern is that without attaching a reference to a defined list this 
becomes untestable.
 
Thanks,
AWK
 
Andrew Kirkpatrick
Group Product Manager, Accessibility
Adobe 
 
akirkpat@adobe.com
http://twitter.com/awkawk

 
From: "White, Jason J" <jjwhite@ets.org>
Date: Friday, January 12, 2018 at 12:51
To: Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>, Marc Johlic <
marc.johlic@gmail.com>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: RE: Possible wording for 1.3.4?
 
For content implemented using technologies that support specifying the 
purpose of specific types of form input fields, the purpose of each such 
field of a supported type can be programmatically determined.
 
From: Andrew Kirkpatrick [mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com] 
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2018 12:29 PM
To: Marc Johlic <marc.johlic@gmail.com>; WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Possible wording for 1.3.4?
 
Thanks Marc.
 
Here’s a version with further edits:
In content implemented using technologies with support for identifying the 
expected meaning for form input data, the meaning can be programmatically 
determined for each user interface component that accepts user input 
corresponding to the user; inputs matching a meaning provided in the HTML 
5.2 Autofill field names must expose that meaning except if the technology 
being used does not support a corresponding autofill meaning.
 
What do people think?
 
Thanks,
AWK
 
Andrew Kirkpatrick
Group Product Manager, Accessibility
Adobe 
 
akirkpat@adobe.com
http://twitter.com/awkawk

 
From: Marc Johlic <marc.johlic@gmail.com>
Date: Friday, January 12, 2018 at 12:03
To: Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>, WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: Re: Possible wording for 1.3.4?
 
I like the idea / premise and would +1 this replacing the wording in 1.3.4 
- and even keeping it at AA with this idea / premise / wording. 
 
I know we're out of time, but I would like to simplify the wording of the 
SC if possible.  Sorry - no ideas right off the top of my head..  I'll try 
to come up with suggestions.  It really just boils down to being as simple 
as Leonie asked..  if your tech supports autofill, use it - but I know the 
SC language needs to cover all of the bases.  (It just took me a few read 
throughs to "get it").
 
Even if the wording stays as is, I would +1 this replacing current 1.3.4 
wording - and leaving in as AA.
 
-Marc Johlic 
 
On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 10:43 AM, Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com> 
wrote:
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?

That is right. Of course there isn’t a value needed for every input, just 
the ones with the meaning that matches the list.

The SC also applies to other technologies that support autofill. If a 
technology other than HTML supports autofill and has some of the values 
that HTML 5.2 supports, those values need to be supported when using that 
technology also.

AWK


    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://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.w3.org%2FTR%2Fhtml52%2Fsec-forms.html%23autofill-field&data=02%7C01%7Cakirkpat%40adobe.com%7C6fb521158e4c4022002908d559d1ba79%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636513679887347881&sdata=ToUIE6G%2FsKjrtn5JMEwM9hTps6iMOc6BtZwokR8IAzI%3D&reserved=0

> 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.
    >
    > 
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Frawgit.com%2Fw3c%2Fwcag21%2F1.3.4_autofill%2Fguidelines%2Findex.html%23identify-common-purpose&data=02%7C01%7Cakirkpat%40adobe.com%7C6fb521158e4c4022002908d559d1ba79%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636513679887347881&sdata=VHpV4ttfM7I2%2FFKZW6SCulpl8NgMOw%2BtZ2%2BRHugkCtE%3D&reserved=0


    >
    > 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
    >
    > 
https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2Fawkawk&data=02%7C01%7Cakirkpat%40adobe.com%7C6fb521158e4c4022002908d559d1ba79%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636513679887347881&sdata=LG6X%2BPhGvkisWjEcmBqgBy%2FteFAEl9tq2izWdcwmbio%3D&reserved=0

    >

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

This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or 
confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for whom 
it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this e-mail 
in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute, or 
take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and 
delete it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited.
 
Thank you for your compliance.



This e-mail and any files transmitted with it may contain privileged or 
confidential information. It is solely for use by the individual for whom 
it is intended, even if addressed incorrectly. If you received this e-mail 
in error, please notify the sender; do not disclose, copy, distribute, or 
take any action in reliance on the contents of this information; and 
delete it from your system. Any other use of this e-mail is prohibited.

Thank you for your compliance.