Re: Finding agreement on common purpose

> It was dropped a while ago due to internationalisation issues,

I agree languages other than English would be precarious. However, if an
English author wants to use the appropriate "purpose" as the label, I don't
think they should be punished by also having to add redundant metadata.

> it would limit the terms that people could use in labels, which was not
acceptable.

No, it would cause them to have to add metadata to provide that proper
"purpose" term.

I think the AT should be able to figure this out... its a huge ask for
forms across the web to have to add redundant autofill when many of the
labels are perfectly worded.



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 Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 9:44 AM, Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
wrote:

> *David wrote:*
>
> *> *I have confusion about whether the ACCNAME, ACCDESCRIPTION could be
> used as those tokens (at least in the English language), in which case,
> <label> element with a a common purpose would be sufficient.
>
>
>
> That was discussed as a technique (~August 2017) before we had scoped out
> microdata as the technique for links.
>
>
>
> It was dropped a while ago due to internationalisation issues, and it
> would limit the terms that people could use in labels, which was not
> acceptable.
>
>
>
> I think it does need to be done in metadata (attributes) rather than
> visible text or AccName.
>
>
>
> -Alastair
>