Re: What is a failure of 1.3.5 Identify Input Purpose?

Hi Josh,

I understand. For your 'can't cook won't cook' audience, I'd suggest the
following:

   - Step one: Identify form inputs that are related *ONLY* to the actual
   user (i.e. the likely owner of the computer). Family members or other
   persons who's information may be captured in the form by the user are not
   required to be included here, only inputs about the actual user.

   - Step two: for any <input type="text"> that is related to the end user,
   add the @autocomplete attribute and appropriate token value.

I suggest this in the same spirit of guidance we'd likely offer for SC
1.1.1 (where *we* know there are multiple techniques), but we tell the
inexperienced content creator "...*add an @alt attribute for images that
are informative, actionable, or complex. For decorative images use alt="".*"

Does that boil it down enough?

JF

On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 10:30 AM Joshue O Connor - InterAccess <
josh@interaccess.ie> wrote:

> Hi John,
>
> John Foliot wrote:
>
> Hi Josh,
>
> > its that 'on a per-input basis' that's just not clear from the SC
>
>
> *Success Criterion 1.3.5 Identify Input Purpose: *The purpose of each
> input field collecting information about the user...
>
> Josh, I'm struggling to figure out how to author this so that the
> requirement is clearer, given the highlighted bits of the quoted SC (i.e.,
> "each input field... about the user"). We cannot "re-open" the normative
> text at this time, but is there something in the Understanding document
> that we should add, modify or otherwise clarify?
>
> I think its the not the text of the SC that is the issue, but the
> understanding of the 'thing to do to satisfy' the SC.
> Heck, it only took me a ~ 35+ email thread, input from two chairs and some
> of the worlds best a11y experts for me to get it.
>
> I'm currently working on 'how to guidance' for a potential 'can't cook
> won't cook' audience so I needed some bullet proof guidance.
> Something is lost in translation for sure.
>
> Thanks
>
> Josh
>
>
> JF
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 29, 2019 at 8:29 AM Joshue O Connor - InterAccess <
> josh@interaccess.ie> wrote:
>
>> Alastair Campbell wrote:
>>
>> Joshue O Connor wrote:
>> > A well marked up and otherwise accessible form, is a fail of this SC
>> *only* when it contains information about the user and none of the related
>> metadata tokens (as per what are defined in/a la autocomplete attribute).
>> Correct?
>>
>> That’s my understanding, I’d just phrase it on a per-input basis, you’d
>> be looking at each field rather than the form as a whole.
>>
>> Thanks Alistair - and I think you are right, its that 'on a per-input
>> basis' that's just not clear from the SC, and makes the practical 'how to
>> part' of this difficult to understand. Just look at this thread - never
>> mind how the real world will struggle with understanding it.
>>
>> Josh
>>
>>
>>
>> I.e. an *input* would fail **only** when it is asking for information
>> about the user that matches one of the related metadata tokens, and it does
>> not have any (accessibility supported) metadata included.
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>>
>>
>> -Alastair
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Joshue O Connor
>> Director | InterAccess.ie
>>
>
>
> --
> *​John Foliot* | Principal Accessibility Strategist | W3C AC
> Representative
> Deque Systems - Accessibility for Good
> deque.com
>
>
>
> --
> Joshue O Connor
> Director | InterAccess.ie
>


-- 
*​John Foliot* | Principal Accessibility Strategist | W3C AC Representative
Deque Systems - Accessibility for Good
deque.com