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

+1 to David writing up a failure technique about the placeholder attribute
and 3.3.2
+1 for clarifying specifically that placeholder is eligible to be a last
ditch resort for accessible name in F68 (so people don't have to read thru
long threads to figure this out)

Peace, Love & A11Y,
Goodwitch

*glenda sims* <glenda.sims@deque.com>, cpacc
<http://www.accessibilityassociation.org/certification>   | team a11y lead
| 512.963.3773

        deque systems <http://www.deque.com>  accessibility for good

On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 9:50 AM, David MacDonald <david100@sympatico.ca>
wrote:

> It might make sense to add a failure:
>
> "Failure of SC 3.3.2 due to using the HTML placeholder attribute for a
> label on form fields"
>
> I could write that up and do a pull request on Github.
>
> Cheers,
> David MacDonald
>
>
>
> *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*
>
> Tel:  613.235.4902
>
> LinkedIn
> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacdonald100>
>
> twitter.com/davidmacd
>
> GitHub <https://github.com/DavidMacDonald>
>
> www.Can-Adapt.com <http://www.can-adapt.com/>
>
>
>
> *  Adapting the web to all users*
> *            Including those with disabilities*
>
> If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy
> <http://www.davidmacd.com/disclaimer.html>
>
> On Thu, Aug 9, 2018 at 9:41 AM, Newton, Brooks (Legal) <
> Brooks.Newton@thomsonreuters.com> wrote:
>
>> Thank you, David, for the excellent write up and explanation of how
>> placeholder works with current user agent and assistive technology
>> combinations.  Also, thanks for providing clarity on the intent of SC
>> 3.3.2. I’ve got your blog post bookmarked.
>>
>>
>>
>> Also, many thanks to Stefan, Andrew, Glenda, Jon, Patrick and Eric for
>> the valuable contributions to this thread.  Glenda, great summary of the
>> issues at play with using placeholder text.  My understanding of this topic
>> is substantially improved having read everyone’s thoughts on this subject.
>>
>>
>>
>> Brooks
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* David MacDonald [mailto:david100@sympatico.ca]
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 08, 2018 8:09 PM
>> *To:* Glenda Sims <glenda.sims@deque.com>
>> *Cc:* Eric Eggert <ee@w3.org>; Schnabel, Stefan <stefan.schnabel@sap.com>;
>> Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>; WCAG <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
>> *Subject:* Re: Bug: Firefox Accessibility Inspector reports placeholder
>> attribute as eligible for accessible name
>>
>>
>>
>> I've done some testing and posted the results on Placeholder and offer my
>> opinion on what WCAG says, and my memories of what 3.3.2 meant when we were
>> writing it.
>>
>>
>>
>> http://davidmacd.com/blog/is-placeholder-accessible-label.html
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__davidmacd.com_blog_is-2Dplaceholder-2Daccessible-2Dlabel.html&d=DwMFaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-GVjSLmy8-1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=W3VUihr49D2x8upR4FtjMIsy0FSGEnqb4ghTiQJMtRw&m=tn3Zye3R_PBJ2o8yLqfYtSRbqvAzByfmpy1CLSlllCM&s=u1jVO0Q2MaEBF_n7bkWBDdilqcK3chxASBjOA3oWrFY&e=>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> David MacDonald
>>
>>
>>
>> *Can**Adapt* *Solutions Inc.*
>>
>> Tel:  613.235.4902
>>
>> LinkedIn
>>
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.linkedin.com_in_davidmacdonald100&d=DwMFaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-GVjSLmy8-1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=W3VUihr49D2x8upR4FtjMIsy0FSGEnqb4ghTiQJMtRw&m=tn3Zye3R_PBJ2o8yLqfYtSRbqvAzByfmpy1CLSlllCM&s=2G0PyiGOzGRrFbuCwET8RhiOp8RfowVS80MS8_LCsr0&e=>
>>
>> twitter.com/davidmacd
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__twitter.com_davidmacd&d=DwMFaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-GVjSLmy8-1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=W3VUihr49D2x8upR4FtjMIsy0FSGEnqb4ghTiQJMtRw&m=tn3Zye3R_PBJ2o8yLqfYtSRbqvAzByfmpy1CLSlllCM&s=XVKYwoQDl-OoIjHd9u4g0wrSxWvDyF6cI4UDrW03Co8&e=>
>>
>> GitHub
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_DavidMacDonald&d=DwMFaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-GVjSLmy8-1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=W3VUihr49D2x8upR4FtjMIsy0FSGEnqb4ghTiQJMtRw&m=tn3Zye3R_PBJ2o8yLqfYtSRbqvAzByfmpy1CLSlllCM&s=nLvM6DdDGExUWgl0kyX-hQnIvpOYvorGSmVsA8XHiGg&e=>
>>
>> www.Can-Adapt.com
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.can-2Dadapt.com_&d=DwMFaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-GVjSLmy8-1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=W3VUihr49D2x8upR4FtjMIsy0FSGEnqb4ghTiQJMtRw&m=tn3Zye3R_PBJ2o8yLqfYtSRbqvAzByfmpy1CLSlllCM&s=ldO9OG2YJi6pITnxqcnYFgcRBvIFCWKbzCco7Sd1nQo&e=>
>>
>>
>>
>> *  Adapting the web to all users*
>>
>> *            Including those with disabilities*
>>
>>
>>
>> If you are not the intended recipient, please review our privacy policy
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.davidmacd.com_disclaimer.html&d=DwMFaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-GVjSLmy8-1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=W3VUihr49D2x8upR4FtjMIsy0FSGEnqb4ghTiQJMtRw&m=tn3Zye3R_PBJ2o8yLqfYtSRbqvAzByfmpy1CLSlllCM&s=2qu5zad5mgom20h3CmKsd3xGPHB4A8PzGNx9Jb6Bs8Q&e=>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 8:37 PM, Glenda Sims <glenda.sims@deque.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> I think I can find a11y peace with the thought of placeholder being (as a
>> last ditch choice) allowed to serve as accessible name.  And agreeing with
>> Jon Avila that that placeholder value serving as an accessible name needs
>> to be meaningful as a label.
>>
>>
>>
>> Eric, Patrick,  is it still valid for me to ask for F68 to be updated to
>> include placeholder? https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20
>> 161007/F68
>>
>>
>>
>> And if placeholder can be an accessible name, then my dang codepen
>> example would pass WCAG 2.1 SC 2.5.3 Label in Name  (sigh)
>>
>>
>>
>> And then failing my codepen on SC 3.3.2 Labels or Instructions (when the
>> placeholder disappears and there is no visible label).   (nodding in
>> agreement to Brooks)
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks for entertaining this question and helping me see more clearly.
>>
>> G
>>
>>
>> *glenda sims* <glenda.sims@deque.com>, cpacc
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.accessibilityassociation.org_certification&d=DwMFaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-GVjSLmy8-1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=W3VUihr49D2x8upR4FtjMIsy0FSGEnqb4ghTiQJMtRw&m=tn3Zye3R_PBJ2o8yLqfYtSRbqvAzByfmpy1CLSlllCM&s=GFDnfNnBOfxgySz7U9F_swJk6GzEL15VaWMs1A1HTu0&e=>
>>  | team a11y lead | 512.963.3773
>>
>>
>>
>>         deque systems
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.deque.com&d=DwMFaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-GVjSLmy8-1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=W3VUihr49D2x8upR4FtjMIsy0FSGEnqb4ghTiQJMtRw&m=tn3Zye3R_PBJ2o8yLqfYtSRbqvAzByfmpy1CLSlllCM&s=89tIR9rgOqPHeKvm6bmrWc6H3w7ZcOMstQMM28gVfyI&e=>
>>   accessibility for good
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 4:24 PM, Eric Eggert <ee@w3.org> wrote:
>>
>> <w3c-hat off>
>>
>> Hi Glenda, all,
>>
>> Just a quick reminder that if something that is not a WCAG compliant
>> technique, it does not mean that browsers are not allowed to surface it in
>> their APIs.
>>
>> If browsers decide to surface the placeholder as an accessible name with
>> the alternative of having no description at all, I think that’s their
>> discretion. I also think that screen reader users would/do appreciate that
>> as it renders form fields accessible to them where they otherwise wouldn't
>> be for them. (There are accessibility issues for other Groups.) I
>> personally don’t feel it serves them well to be thrown under the bus for
>> theoretical purity.
>>
>> As for the argument that having it in the accessible name calculation
>> would encourage developers to use just placeholders, I don’t feel that’s
>> valid from my day-to-day observations. They use the pattern because it is
>> modern and because they can. Most developers don’t care about the
>> accessibility of their websites, still. But they know they have to add some
>> text to the field so there is a chance that users can fill it out.
>>
>> I totally think “just placeholders” should be flagged in testing tools
>> and maybe in browsers and validators, too, if the group decides it violates
>> WCAG. But I think if browsers want to let assistive technologies grasp onto
>> that last straw of an accessible name, let them have it.
>>
>> Eric
>>
>> On 8 Aug 2018, at 19:43, Glenda Sims wrote:
>>
>> Alastair,
>>
>>
>>
>> Would it be possible to bring up this question on the next AGWG agenda?
>> Reason I'm dealing with the question right now...we are assessing client
>> sites for WCAG 2.1 SC 2.5.3 Label in Name https://www.w3.org/TR/WCA
>> G21/#label-in-name
>>
>>
>>
>> I think it is important, that a11y experts be able to agree on whether
>> the following code snippet minimally passes:
>>
>>
>>
>> WCAG 2.1 SC 1.3.1 Info and Relationships
>>
>> WCAG 2.1 SC 2.5.3 Label in Name
>>
>>
>>
>> Code snippet: <input type="text"  name="first"  placeholder="First Name"
>> id="first">
>>
>> Sample of code to test: https://codepen.io/goodwitch/pen/OwEmEw
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__codepen.io_goodwitch_pen_OwEmEw&d=DwMFaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-GVjSLmy8-1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=W3VUihr49D2x8upR4FtjMIsy0FSGEnqb4ghTiQJMtRw&m=tn3Zye3R_PBJ2o8yLqfYtSRbqvAzByfmpy1CLSlllCM&s=9YAF65uCv_JYHHvpkD-8DGB2LG8uMi-GrKtBnGa482c&e=>
>>
>> Firefox Accessibility Inspector reports this field as having an
>> accessible name of “First Name”
>>
>>
>>
>> I believe it fails both
>>
>>    - 1.3.1 Info and Relationships
>>
>>
>>    - (based on F68 https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/NOTE-WCAG20-TECHS-20161007/
>>       F68)
>>
>>
>>    - 2.5.3 Label in Name
>>
>>
>>    - because the placeholder text fails to be the accessible name based
>>       on F68
>>
>> In the interest of helping people with disabilities...I am starting to
>> see what Jamie Teh is saying about placeholder being like title.  And I'm
>> about to say something super controversial...do we need to update Failure
>> Technique 68.
>>
>>
>>
>> Peace out,
>>
>> Glenda
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *glenda sims* <glenda.sims@deque.com>, cpacc
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.accessibilityassociation.org_certification&d=DwMFaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-GVjSLmy8-1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=W3VUihr49D2x8upR4FtjMIsy0FSGEnqb4ghTiQJMtRw&m=tn3Zye3R_PBJ2o8yLqfYtSRbqvAzByfmpy1CLSlllCM&s=GFDnfNnBOfxgySz7U9F_swJk6GzEL15VaWMs1A1HTu0&e=>
>>  | team a11y lead | 512.963.3773
>>
>>
>>
>>         deque systems
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.deque.com&d=DwMFaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-GVjSLmy8-1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=W3VUihr49D2x8upR4FtjMIsy0FSGEnqb4ghTiQJMtRw&m=tn3Zye3R_PBJ2o8yLqfYtSRbqvAzByfmpy1CLSlllCM&s=89tIR9rgOqPHeKvm6bmrWc6H3w7ZcOMstQMM28gVfyI&e=>
>>   accessibility for good
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 1:01 AM, Schnabel, Stefan <stefan.schnabel@sap.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> 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.
>>
>>
>>
>> There is a temptation in saying “browsers! Don”t map authoring errors”.
>> But this is like expecting from your camera “don’t photograph this! It’s
>> pathetic”. Such an approach lacks simplicity and makes things difficult to
>> predict from a technical perspective.
>>
>>
>>
>> The more interesting case is
>>
>>
>>
>> <input placeholder=“foo” aria-label=“bar” title=“fine”>
>>
>>
>>
>> How can it be granted that on focus screen readers will speak all three
>> exploiting the API mapping and not using the DOM info?
>>
>>
>>
>> - Stefan
>>
>>
>>
>> Von meinem iPad gesendet
>>
>>
>> Am 07.08.2018 um 22:47 schrieb Patrick H. Lauke <redux@splintered.co.uk>:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 07/08/2018 21:37, Patrick H. Lauke wrote:
>> ...
>>
>> The reason why placeholder is not advisable as a sole labelling mechanism
>> is because it has usability and accessibility (e.g. for COGA) issues. But
>> is that a reason not to have browsers expose it? Should they expose it only
>> if there's another accessible name, and just as an accessible description?
>> Or not at all?
>>
>>
>> For that matter, I could make an input with just, say, aria-label, and
>> that gets exposed as the accessible name...e.g. just
>>
>> <input aria-label="foo">
>>
>> 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?
>>
>> P
>> --
>> Patrick H. Lauke
>>
>> www.splintered.co.uk
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.splintered.co.uk&d=DwMFaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-GVjSLmy8-1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=W3VUihr49D2x8upR4FtjMIsy0FSGEnqb4ghTiQJMtRw&m=tn3Zye3R_PBJ2o8yLqfYtSRbqvAzByfmpy1CLSlllCM&s=h-ZNT83pqNejSsSuqfErEuL50yBDI_GH6HTF9zMiyC8&e=>
>> | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_patrickhlauke&d=DwMFaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-GVjSLmy8-1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=W3VUihr49D2x8upR4FtjMIsy0FSGEnqb4ghTiQJMtRw&m=tn3Zye3R_PBJ2o8yLqfYtSRbqvAzByfmpy1CLSlllCM&s=wZXWcWpGzfAVHn_HHwhYjU5QBof7XvWf0aK8goDcv3Y&e=>
>> http://flickr.com/photos/redux/
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__flickr.com_photos_redux_&d=DwMFaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-GVjSLmy8-1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=W3VUihr49D2x8upR4FtjMIsy0FSGEnqb4ghTiQJMtRw&m=tn3Zye3R_PBJ2o8yLqfYtSRbqvAzByfmpy1CLSlllCM&s=3EVXJjI8y_32BP1G4xoJRWjr_ZIDRIfPQgplCweoVf4&e=>
>> | http://redux.deviantart.com
>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__redux.deviantart.com&d=DwMFaQ&c=4ZIZThykDLcoWk-GVjSLmy8-1Cr1I4FWIvbLFebwKgY&r=W3VUihr49D2x8upR4FtjMIsy0FSGEnqb4ghTiQJMtRw&m=tn3Zye3R_PBJ2o8yLqfYtSRbqvAzByfmpy1CLSlllCM&s=3CL1hckKHQ-5aKRSTKQQ7OUhD3BH6jYiAGIl9_wDSto&e=>
>> twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> Eric Eggert
>> Web Accessibility Specialist
>> Web Accessibility Initiative (WAI) at World Wide Web Consortium (W3C)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>