- From: Jim Thatcher <thatch@attglobal.net>
- Date: Thu, 03 May 2001 22:49:52 -0500
- To: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>, ADAM GUASCH-MELENDEZ <ADAM.GUASCH@EEOC.GOV>, rneff@bbnow.net, w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
- Message-id: <NDBBKJDAKKEJDCICIODLMEBBDBAA.thatch@attglobal.net>
Al, In the section of the course on Web Accessibility for Section 508 that I have done for ITTATC (http://jimthatcher.com/webcourse8.htm) I added the comments about title after going through all the usual methods - sort a post script. I don't feel good about that. I think Title solves the serious deficiency of label and I believe it will be supported by screen readers quickly. My understanding is that Window-Eyes currently supports title on input elements; HPR will support it in a point release, and JFW is "interested." The browser in all cases is, in effect, IE. Jim jim@jimthatcher.com Accessibility Consulting http://jimthatcher.com 512-306-0931 -----Original Message----- From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Al Gilman Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2001 6:29 PM To: ADAM GUASCH-MELENDEZ; rneff@bbnow.net; w3c-wai-ig@w3.org Subject: RE: Form labeling and user agent support In a similar thread on the GL list, Jim Thatcher suggested we not bother with LABEL and just use a TITLE on a form control. That was an edit box control. But the idea might be the same, here. I am still hoping to learn more about the "implementation status" of TITLE on INPUT. What browser and screen reader combinations get this information to the user, and which don't? <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2001AprJun/thread.html#113> If we have reasonable implementation coverage on this, or even on TITLE -OR- LABEL and the web page does both -- that could be a way to respect the visual norm where the checkboxes line up at the head of their list items. At 03:45 PM 2001-05-02 -0500, ADAM GUASCH-MELENDEZ wrote: >Yes, we're doing that too. We're using FIELDSET and LEGEND to group/label the ordering info (name, address, etc.), as well as grouping various categories of related documents. > >>>> "Robert Neff" <rneff@bbnow.net> 05/02/01 02:39pm >>> >labels are just one part of WCAG version 1. are you also trying to implement >fieldsets? refernce >http://www.w3.org/TR/html401/interact/forms.html#edef-FIELDSET > >here si teh cut and pastes for the WCAG: >12.3 Divide large blocks of information into more manageable groups where >natural and appropriate. [Priority 2] (Checkpoint 12.3) >HTML Techniques: Structural grouping >HTML Techniques: Grouping form controls >12.4 Associate labels explicitly with their controls. [Priority 2] >(Checkpoint 12.4) >HTML Techniques: Labeling form controls > >-----Original Message----- >From: w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:w3c-wai-ig-request@w3.org]On >Behalf Of ADAM GUASCH-MELENDEZ >Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2001 1:48 PM >To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org >Subject: RE: Form labeling and user agent support > > >That requirement states: > >"When electronic forms are designed to be completed on-line, the form shall >allow people using assistive technology to access the information, field >elements, and functionality required for completion and submission of the >form, including all directions and cues." > >As I read it, the same question applies: does using form labeling "allow >people using assistive technology to access the information, field elements, >and functionality" given the current state of user agent support? I see no >real difference between this and the relevant sections of the WCAG. An >answer to one answers the other. > >If you're wondering why I asked my question in the context of the WCAG >instead of the federal guidelines, it's because I find the Access Board's >work to be a decent start, but on the whole a watered-down and insufficient >standard. I'll comply with it, of course, but I aim for a higher standard > > >>>> "Cynthia Waddell" <cynthia.waddell@psinetcs.com> 05/02/01 12:37pm >>> >Will you not be following the requirements of the Electronic and Information >Technology Accessibility Standards for web forms at Section 1194.22(n)? > >Cynthia Waddell >
Received on Thursday, 3 May 2001 23:51:53 UTC