RE: Bug: Firefox Accessibility Inspector reports placeholder attribute as eligible for accessible name

Oohh, interesting, some lovely chicken & egg issues here. I tend to agree with Patrick where he said:
> the name calculation should take into account placeholder (as a last resort

For a browser serving it's users, if there is no other info for that input then that's the best thing to do.

For a spec trying to get authors to do the right thing, don't mention the placeholder attr.

Jon Avila said in a comment:
> Would you allow the file name of an img to be used as the accessible name of the image if non-existed?

I think that is the case in many screenreaders, at least for image links?

Is this a case where it's good for the implementations and spec to diverge? (Very slightly.)
The authoring advice is consistent, but the browser has a back-stop.

Cheers,

-Alastair

Received on Tuesday, 7 August 2018 20:27:43 UTC