Re: SC 1.3.4 - to keep or not?

Alastair,

The whole SC currently is about 'meaning of each input field' - and not
about helping users to have forms autofill for them. Yes, that needs to be
'programmatically determinable' so AT can access the populated values to
check them, but the SC text would need to change.

Also all the support information around it needs to address that this is an
SC about user memory cognitive impairments. This does not address
personalization issues, and the support information needs to drop the whole
metadata tokens rationale, and clearly be refocused provide help around memory
cognitive impairments related to form inputs and provide the rationale to
address this specific user need.

Additionally, if this change were to happen, it needs to be moved to be
under Guideline 3.3: Input Assistance.


** katie **

*Katie Haritos-Shea*
*Principal ICT Accessibility Architect *

*WCAG/Section 508/ADA/AODA/QA/FinServ/FinTech/Privacy,* *IAAP CPACC+WAS = *
*CPWA* <http://www.accessibilityassociation.org/cpwacertificants>

*Cell: **703-371-5545 <703-371-5545>** |* *ryladog@gmail.com
<ryladog@gmail.com>* *| **Oakton, VA **|* *LinkedIn Profile
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/katieharitosshea/>*

People may forget exactly what it was that you said or did,
but people will never forget how you made them feel.......

Our scars remind us of where we have been........they do not have to
dictate where we are going.

On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 2:10 PM, Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
wrote:

> I’m struggling to see in what way the SC text (rather than understand)
> needs updating?
>
> It got so narrowed to only use autocomplete, it is just an update of the
> reasoning behind it (in the understanding) that is needed...
>
> The meta-data aspect is needed, it is the rational behind it (which isn’t
> in the SC text, barring the handle) that needs to change to catch up.
>
> -Alastair
>
> Apologies for typos, sent from a mobile.
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Katie Haritos-Shea <ryladog@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Thursday, February 22, 2018 7:01:13 PM
>
> *To:* Alastair Campbell
> *Cc:* lisa.seeman; John Foliot; W3c-Wai-Gl-Request@W3. Org
> *Subject:* Re: SC 1.3.4 - to keep or not?
>
> Alastair,
>
> Of course I believe you, and I did read the minutes of today's COGA TF,
> which I know does not always show the richness of the discussion.
>
> If the COGA TF thinks this meets the requirements of one of their other
> identified user needs, and I think it certainly could, for helping those
> with memory challenges, then the SC should be redone, to address 'that'
> user problem - not the personalization issue - and drop the whole metadata
> tokens rationale. All the support information around it needs to address
> that, the user memory cognitive impairments issue.
>
> The COGA minutes seemed to say that 1.3.4 does not help personalization,
> so that SC  should be identified as doing so.
>
> ** katie **
>
> *Katie Haritos-Shea*
> *Principal ICT Accessibility Architect *
>
> *WCAG/Section 508/ADA/AODA/QA/FinServ/FinTech/Privacy,* *IAAP CPACC+WAS
> = **CPWA* <http://www.accessibilityassociation.org/cpwacertificants>
>
> *Cell: **703-371-5545 <703-371-5545>** |* *ryladog@gmail.com
> <ryladog@gmail.com>* *| **Oakton, VA **|* *LinkedIn Profile
> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/katieharitosshea/>*
>
> People may forget exactly what it was that you said or did,
> but people will never forget how you made them feel.......
>
> Our scars remind us of where we have been........they do not have to
> dictate where we are going.
>
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 1:42 PM, Alastair Campbell <acampbell@nomensa.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi John, Katie,
>>
>> John - I know it *could* apply to autofil, but currently it doesn’t.
>>
>> Katie, sorry I missed your suggestion, lots of long emails recently.
>>
>> On the topic, the COGA TF brought many, many needs to the table that
>> resulted in around 30 potential SC.
>>
>> No, this doesn’t address them all, and is *very* limited for
>> personalisation. However, it does fulfil *a* need that severely impacts
>> people with cognitive impairments (e.g. credit card entry).
>>
>> If you don’t believe me, please ask Lisa or EA who were on the call today
>> and were very enthusiastic about it.
>>
>> Plus, the impact on developers is hardly huge (for the autofil one). It
>> is a few attributes that Google already promotes as best-practice. This
>> would give it extra leverage.
>> Cheers,
>>
>> -Alastair
>>
>> Apologies for typos, sent from a mobile.
>> ------------------------------
>> *From:* Katie Haritos-Shea <ryladog@gmail.com>
>> *Sent:* Thursday, February 22, 2018 6:08:16 PM
>> *To:* Alastair Campbell
>> *Cc:* lisa.seeman; John Foliot; W3c-Wai-Gl-Request@W3. Org
>> *Subject:* Re: SC 1.3.4 - to keep or not?
>>
>> Well, I think changing the SC to autocomplete was brought up by me.
>>
>> But in any case, I am not for it personally, for the reasons I identified
>> in the other email thread called 'Use of ARIA to satisfy 'Identify common
>> purpose' SC' - it will not address the original user need brought to us by
>> COGA, at all - and it adds a burden for developers - without it going in
>> the direction of the technology that we 'do' need to inject accessibility
>> metadata for personalization into web content.
>>
>> We can suggest authors use the features of HTML 5+ that were designed for
>> and by default do improve accessibility for different populations. The
>> HTML  autocomplete attribute is helpful for all in several ways, but
>> mandating its use as a requirement (and for the wrong reasons IMO) I am not
>> sure is the best idea.
>>
>> ** katie **
>>
>> *Katie Haritos-Shea*
>> *Principal ICT Accessibility Architect *
>>
>> *WCAG/Section 508/ADA/AODA/QA/FinServ/FinTech/Privacy,* *IAAP CPACC+WAS
>> = **CPWA* <http://www.accessibilityassociation.org/cpwacertificants>
>>
>> *Cell: **703-371-5545 <703-371-5545>** |* *ryladog@gmail.com
>> <ryladog@gmail.com>* *| **Oakton, VA **|* *LinkedIn Profile
>> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/katieharitosshea/>*
>>
>> People may forget exactly what it was that you said or did,
>> but people will never forget how you made them feel.......
>>
>> Our scars remind us of where we have been........they do not have to
>> dictate where we are going.
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 12:27 PM, Alastair Campbell <
>> acampbell@nomensa.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Everyone,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I had two relevant discussions about this today, firstly with the COGA
>>> TF, then with the few people who joined the AG call out of habit 😉
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The feeling from the COGA TF was that 1.3.4 is a useful SC to have, and
>>> helps with an issue that dis-proportionally impacts people with cognitive
>>> impairments.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> However, it is not (as I hoped) a useful starting point for
>>> personalisation, partly because the current tools do not support autofill
>>> attributes to apply icons.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Lisa: please correct this if I’m not conveying that properly.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Therefore John’s proposal to rename the handle of the SC should be taken
>>> on to avoid confusion, hopefully as an editorial change.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> As it is completely focused on autocompleting inputs, I’d favour:
>>>
>>>    - Auto-complete​
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> But I’m not wedded to that term…
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -Alastair
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>