RE: Is wikipedia really an example of a fail for 2.4.12?

  *   As I said before, my opinion is that there is no programmatic/accessible name provided for the language select input on the Wikipedia home page.  It doesn’t matter if there is a label or not.   This implementation fails SC 2.4.12.

Yes, that’s what I said – there is no programmatic name for the language and no visual label for the language – we are in agreement.

Jonathan

Jonathan Avila
Chief Accessibility Officer
Level Access
jon.avila@levelaccess.com
703.637.8957 office

Visit us online:
Website<http://www.levelaccess.com/> | Twitter<https://twitter.com/LevelAccessA11y> | Facebook<https://www.facebook.com/LevelAccessA11y/> | LinkedIn<https://www.linkedin.com/company/level-access> | Blog<http://www.levelaccess.com/blog/>

See you at CSUN in March!<http://info.levelaccess.com/CSUN-2018-Sessions.html>

From: Brooks.Newton@thomsonreuters.com <Brooks.Newton@thomsonreuters.com>
Sent: Monday, March 5, 2018 5:42 PM
To: Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@levelaccess.com>; Jake.Abma@ing.com; josh@interaccess.ie; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: RE: Is wikipedia really an example of a fail for 2.4.12?

Hey All,

As I said before, my opinion is that there is no programmatic/accessible name provided for the language select input on the Wikipedia home page.  It doesn’t matter if there is a label or not.   This implementation fails SC 2.4.12.

No matter how you analyze the label in this example, there will never be a label in the name, because the name doesn’t exist.

Now, if “EN” were in fact the label and the name were in fact “English,” then I would say this implementation also fails, but for different reasons.  This SC was primarily introduced as a way of making sure that spoken “labels” would match up with programmatically-determinable names, right?  I don’t know about you, but when I pronounce “EN” it sounds phonetically like the word “in.”  And, when I pronounce the first syllable of the word “English,” it sounds phonetically like “ing.”  The two phonemes simply don’t match up.  This brings up the broader issue of how contractions, abbreviations and other shortened forms of words don’t always sound like the words they represent.  And, therefore, I think that abbreviations may not be reliably used to satisfy the label in name requirement. What are others’ thoughts on this?

Brooks

From: Jonathan Avila [mailto:jon.avila@levelaccess.com]
Sent: Monday, March 05, 2018 3:16 PM
To: Abma, J.D. (Jake); Newton, Brooks (Legal); josh@interaccess.ie<mailto:josh@interaccess.ie>; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: RE: Is wikipedia really an example of a fail for 2.4.12?

Wikipedia definitely has some accessibility issues on this page.

From the stand point of SC 3.3.2  - G167<https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20161007/G167> can be used for the search field itself – but not the Language select.

The search field doesn’t have a text label so I don’t think 2.4.12<https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#label-in-name> applies.

The language  select doesn’t have a programmatic name – so it fails SC 1.3.1/4.1.2.

Regarding SC 2.4.12 – this is tricky because there the visual label – the value for the location is not sufficient to label the element and thus it fails SC 3.3.2 – but by virtue of failing both 3.3.2 and 1.3.1 it would also fail SC 2.4.12 unless we are saying no name is = to no label – in which case null = null which is true.

Jonathan

From: Abma, J.D. (Jake) <Jake.Abma@ing.com<mailto:Jake.Abma@ing.com>>
Sent: Monday, March 5, 2018 12:52 PM
To: Brooks.Newton@thomsonreuters.com<mailto:Brooks.Newton@thomsonreuters.com>; josh@interaccess.ie<mailto:josh@interaccess.ie>; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>; Jonathan Avila <jon.avila@levelaccess.com<mailto:jon.avila@levelaccess.com>>
Subject: Re: Is wikipedia really an example of a fail for 2.4.12?




Hi Brooks/Josh,



Funny thing here is they probably implemented it incorrectly as the 'for' and 'id' indeed don't match but the 'for' and the 'name' attribute on the input does.



But if I remember well, referencing a comment from Jonathan not so long ago, it doesn't matter as the intention of the visible text in this case, the "EN" does serve as the label. The example mentioned by Jonathan was a search field with no label where the button with the text "search" serves the label purpose.



So I'm wondering whether​ the "wrongly" implemented for/id combo (if not done on purpose) matters...



@Jonathan ?



________________________________
From: Brooks.Newton@thomsonreuters.com<mailto:Brooks.Newton@thomsonreuters.com> <Brooks.Newton@thomsonreuters.com<mailto:Brooks.Newton@thomsonreuters.com>>
Sent: Monday, March 5, 2018 5:16 PM
To: josh@interaccess.ie<mailto:josh@interaccess.ie>; w3c-wai-gl@w3.org<mailto:w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: RE: Is wikipedia really an example of a fail for 2.4.12?

Hi Josh,

From my perspective, this isn’t a relevant test for 2.4.12.  I’m no accessible name computation expert, but I don’t think the language select input on the Wikipedia home page has an accessible name.  In other words, there is no programmatically bound label text associated with the input.

What is wrapped in <label> markup has not been programmatically bound to the associated select input.  Specifically the value of the for attribute in the label attribute doesn’t match the value of the id attribute on the select element.

So, the text value of the selected option in <select> is what’s announced by JAWS and NVDA as the name of the input.  The selected option, by default, is “English” when I browse to Wikipedia from my stateside location.   But the word “English” just a heuristic guess that some AT make at what might be a discernible label for this input is, right?  Anyone on the list, please tell me if I’m wrong here.

So there is no accessible name to match up with the visible label.

Brooks

From: Joshue O Connor - InterAccess [mailto:josh@interaccess.ie]
Sent: Friday, March 02, 2018 10:40 AM
To: WCAG
Subject: Is wikipedia really an example of a fail for 2.4.12?

Question on a potential edge case - I'm not sure this a fail if the visual label is abbreviated but still comprehensible and following an established convention? [1]

Accessible matches Visible. The visible and accessible name of a label match

TEXT
https://www.wikipedia.org<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.wikipedia.org&d=DwMFaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-GVjSLmy8-1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=W3VUihr49D2x8upR4FtjMIsy0FSGEnqb4ghTiQJMtRw&m=TPkFAcInejPKzkUFXeZM4xQ2HAxLjoPiAWeTwsdOrx4&s=qpilYEg2ztSqbzGGHsVLHzL5oaRBcJlzhZMNUom9F3Q&e=> => Search field has language dropdown with text "EN" but has name "English" (or other language when selected)

Thoughts?

[1] https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/wiki/WCAG_2.1_Implementations#2.4.12_Label_in_Name

__
Joshue O Connor
Director / InterAccess.ie


-----------------------------------------------------------------

ATTENTION:

The information in this e-mail is confidential and only meant for the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, don't use or disclose it in any way. Please let the sender know and delete the message immediately.

-----------------------------------------------------------------