Re: SC 3.3.4

28.04.2015, 13:29, "Priti Rohra" <priti.rohra@gmail.com>:
> Hi All,
>
> I believe if we go strictly by the success criteria's definition, if
> the form checks for errors and presents users with errors it satisfies
> the SC.

Agreed, but…

> However, a point to remember is that form error will check the
> inputs as per the set validations but the errors that can happen due
> to unintentionally pressing a key or incorrectly entering the
> telephone no. etc and such errors won't be presented as an error. This
> can cause serious consequences if it is a financial transaction.

Right.

> As an user, I will prefer to have the details reviewed before hitting
> the Submit/Confirm button.

Likewise.

It is particularly important for users who cannot remember all the information they entered several screens ago - which applies especially to people with cognitive disabilities, but really to most people most of the time.

> Having said that if it is not technically possible to edit the entered
> data, how about including an Alert as soon as users fill up the first
> step and hits the submit button and including a check box that
> confirms: I have reviewed the details  entered... The alert should
> also clearly mention that details once submitted can not be changed.
>
> This will help meet the SC and take care of the user's requirements.

Actually this meets the success criteria, but IMHO doesn't do such a great job of meeting the user's requirements.

At the very least there should be a review of the complete transaction, which allows the user to continue or abandon and start again if desired. It may or may not meet the success criteria, but it is widely used in the real world, where a lot of transaction systems seem to be pretty horrible to work with.

It is certainly better than assuming people remember all the details when they get to the last step.

Essentially, I am afraid the issue boils down to one of people having second-rate backend systems, and not wanting to change those - which is understandable… if unfortunate.

cheers

Chaals

> Regards,
> Priti Rohra
>
> On 4/27/15, Mattes, Kurt X1 <Kurt.X1.Mattes@chase.com> wrote:
>>  Personally I prefer a final verification screen prior to submitting a form
>>  with any financial implications. However, in a longer multi-step process
>>  verification at each step may be easier for people with cognitive
>>  disabilities as long as it affords an easy way to locate and correct any
>>  errant user provided information.
>>
>>  Regards,
>>  Kurt Mattes
>>  VP - eCAT ADA Controls | JPMorgan Chase
>>
>>  ________________________________________
>>  From: David Woolley [forums@david-woolley.me.uk]
>>  Sent: 27 April 2015 AM 07:07:17
>>  To: w3c-wai-ig@w3.org
>>  Subject: Re: SC 3.3.4
>>
>>  On 27/04/15 10:49, Emanuela Gorla wrote:
>>>  I still believe that a review screen that allows users to check and
>>>  correct information is the best solution. However, would a website that
>>>  does not have a review screen but checks for input errors on each form
>>>  of a purchasing process satisfy SC 3.3.4?
>>  What are the consequences of entering invalid data?  How easy is it to
>>  correct later?  Can correction be done at no cost to the user.
>>
>>  Anything that involves a payment, and especially if shipping, or
>>  customisation, or non-refundable commission costs may be incurred,
>>  really needs a review screen.  Statistical information that will be
>>  anonymised, probably doesn't, as long as a few errors will not
>>  significantly distort the results.
>>  This transmission may contain information that is proprietary, privileged,
>>  confidential, and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law.  If you
>>  are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure,
>>  copying, distribution, or use of the information contained herein (including
>>  any reliance thereon) is STRICTLY PROHIBITED.  If you received this
>>  transmission in error, please immediately contact the sender and destroy the
>>  material in its entirety, whether in electronic or hard copy format.
>>  Although this transmission and any attachments are believed to be free of
>>  any virus or other defect that might affect any computer system into which
>>  it is received and opened, it is the responsibility of the recipient to
>>  ensure that it is virus free and no responsibility is accepted by JPMorgan
>>  Chase & Co., its subsidiaries and affiliates (collectively, "JPMC"), as
>>  applicable, for any loss or damage arising in any way from its use.  Please
>>  note that any electronic communication that is conducted within or through
>>  JPMC's system is subject to interception, monitoring, review, retention and
>>  external production; may be stored or otherwise processed in countries other
>>  than the country in which you are located; and will be treated in accordance
>>  with JPMC's policies and applicable laws and regulations.

--
Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex
chaals@yandex-team.ru - - - Find more at http://yandex.com

Received on Tuesday, 28 April 2015 11:57:08 UTC