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

Hey Andrew,

It’s interesting that the word “visible” isn’t provided in that definition of “label.” Fuzzy indeed, especially when you consider the note for the definition of label that starts out “A label is presented to all users.”  I brought this issue up during WCAG 2.1 discussion of what ultimately became SC 2.5.3 Label in Name, and never really felt like we achieved the clarity necessary to give folks a rock solid understanding of what a label is under the guidelines.  Why wasn’t the word “visible” explicitly included in this definition?  Does the definition of “label” sacrifice clarity in exchange for succinctness?

I’ve always considered this particular ambiguity to be a gaping hole in consistent understanding and compliant adoption of the standards. The topic is ripe for discussion in the next round of accessibility standards making.  Burying this type of critical distinction of what constitutes a “label” in the glossary doesn’t serve folks well, in my opinion.  No more hijacking of the thread, I promise.  Just hoping there was something in WCAG on this topic that I had overlooked.

Thanks Jon and Andrew for your responses.

Brooks

From: Andrew Kirkpatrick [mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2018 10:22 AM
To: Newton, Brooks (Legal) <Brooks.Newton@thomsonreuters.com>; Schnabel, Stefan <stefan.schnabel@sap.com>; Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: Re: Firefox Accessibility Inspector reports placeholder attribute as eligible for accessible name

Brooks,
What is fuzzy is what constitutes a “label”. The definition is https://www.w3.org/TR/WCAG21/#dfn-labels and it is interpreted to include visual information that is present and makes it apparent what the input is for. For example - https://www.google.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.google.com&d=DwMGaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-GVjSLmy8-1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=W3VUihr49D2x8upR4FtjMIsy0FSGEnqb4ghTiQJMtRw&m=yJyq-yHgHYg0MvNwIn4uPN9hNZcoCnVfwv7ZodfIy9w&s=zOo_Hi3at9G18QaYJ3U2vjHxozIKvNosA-BzxLE0YI0&e=> – the “label” might be seen as the text on the adjacent button which reads “google search” or the magnifying glass button adjacent to your search input at https://www.thomsonreuters.com/en.html.


Thanks,
AWK

Andrew Kirkpatrick
Head of Accessibility
Adobe

akirkpat@adobe.com
http://twitter.com/awkawk


From: "Newton, Brooks (Legal)" <Brooks.Newton@thomsonreuters.com>
Date: Wednesday, August 8, 2018 at 10:42
To: Andrew Kirkpatrick <akirkpat@adobe.com>, Stefan Schnabel <stefan.schnabel@sap.com>, Patrick Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
Cc: WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
Subject: RE: Firefox Accessibility Inspector reports placeholder attribute as eligible for accessible name

I’d like to know more about this WCAG requirement for visible labels…

I know that there is requirement for programmatically determinable labels, but not sure there is consensus that visible labels for inputs are specifically required as part of what is explicitly stated in WCAG.

Brooks

From: Andrew Kirkpatrick [mailto:akirkpat@adobe.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2018 9:34 AM
To: Schnabel, Stefan <stefan.schnabel@sap.com>; Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>
Cc: w3c-wai-gl@w3.org
Subject: Re: Firefox Accessibility Inspector reports placeholder attribute as eligible for accessible name

Should this be exposed by the browser to the accessibility API as "foo" or not, if there's nothing else giving the input a programmatic name?

It should. But it violates WCAG requirement for VISIBLE label for input, so it is an authoring error, too.

For the record, there isn’t enough information to say whether this is a violation of WCAG. This certainly meets 4.1.2 (Name Role Value) but there isn’t enough information to say whether it also meets 2.4.6 (Headings and labels).

AWK