RE: Pre-CFC - Redundant entry

My thinking is that the term password may be too limiting as sometimes there might be a PIN or other ID number – but I understand broadening it could impact users who have difficulty in remembering these.  In the case I am thinking it was a identification number.   If the group considers password sufficient I’m good with that.


From: Alastair Campbell <>
Sent: Thursday, June 4, 2020 4:40 PM
To: Jonathan Avila <>
Cc: WCAG list ( <>
Subject: RE: Pre-CFC - Redundant entry

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Hi Jon,

> Do we need a security exception as well?    I’m sure we don’t want it to be too broad as it would diminish the SC.

There is a line at the end of the Intent section that says:
“There is an exception for essential uses of input re-entry for things like password entry (security), or memory games which would not be possible if the previous answers were supplied."

Does that suffice?

> In addition, this raises a question on how this applies to PDF – assuming the whole PDF is considered a page would this or would this not require PDFs to redisplay content or refill content on subsequent form pages within the same PDF?  I assume the user can just scroll up as the content is not hidden – but does this meet the user’s needs?

In that scenario I think it would fit under the “available for the user to select” bullet, assuming you can scroll up to it.

For me that falls into the category of: If someone could think of a neat way to include that, great. However, I can’t see anything that would catch that without opening up other, bigger, issues.



Received on Thursday, 4 June 2020 23:23:53 UTC