RE: 1.3.4, autocomplete and esignatures

Whenever there’s an accessibility-supported metadata arrangement available so that the semantics of form field purposes can be decoupled from the HTML5 autocomplete feature, this won’t be a problem. I agree, however, that there’s at least an interesting legal and policy question in the meantime and acknowledge James’s point.

From: James Nurthen []
Sent: Friday, January 19, 2018 12:57 PM
Subject: Re: 1.3.4, autocomplete and esignatures

On 1/19/2018 8:22 AM, Andrew Kirkpatrick wrote:
I wouldn’t think that a drawn signature would need a “name” value, but if the prompt is “Indicate that you accept this contract by typing your name” then it seems that there is reasonable room for confusion, but I think that that too is being used as a “signature” rather than a name, so believe that we can clarify this in the understanding document.
Maybe we can. The purpose is a signature not the user's name (for example). This definitely needs pointing out as an example were autocomplete MUST NOT be used in the understanding document so there is no confusion by those reading the guidelines.

The definition below was actually taken from an Adobe document which gives an overview of the US law -<>

You can see what the Adobe Sign process is by looking at this:<>
That may be the Adobe process but the law allows different things. If the user typing their name is used as an esignature this must not have autocomplete on it or it could fail the intent to sign provision.


Andrew Kirkpatrick
Group Product Manager, Accessibility

From: James Nurthen <><>
Date: Friday, January 19, 2018 at 11:05
To: WCAG <><>
Subject: 1.3.4, autocomplete and esignatures
Resent-From: WCAG <><>
Resent-Date: Friday, January 19, 2018 at 11:04

I’m concerned that the current 1.3.4 could interfere with esignatures.
One of the requirements is:
Intent to sign.
Just as with a handwritten signature, a signer must show clear intention to electronically sign an agreement. is is usually an easy requirement to satisfy. For example, signers can show intention by using a mouse to draw their signature, typing their name or clicking a button clearly labeled “I Accept” or something similar.

Use of autocomplete on a name field would mean that we could not be sure that the user intended to sign. I think we need a “unless cannot be done due to regulatory requirements” statement.


Regards, James

James Nurthen | Accessibility Architect
Phone: +1 650 506 6781<tel:+1%20650%20506%206781> | Mobile: +1 415 987 1918<tel:+1%20415%20987%201918> | Video:<>
Oracle Corporate Architecture
500 Oracle Parkway | Redwood City, CA 94065
Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment


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.


Received on Friday, 19 January 2018 18:21:52 UTC