E-mail List Archives
Thread: Implicit labeling dropped from WCAG?
Number of posts in this thread: 11 (In chronological order)
From: Birkir R. Gunnarsson
Date: Thu, May 05 2016 4:55PM
Subject: Implicit labeling dropped from WCAG?
No previous message | Next message →
Me and a few colleagues ran into an issue with Voiceover on iOS 9 and
implicitly labeled radiobuttons.
For those who do not know, implicit labeling is when you wrap the form
field to be labeled along with the label text in a label tag, like so:
<label><input type="text" size="30">Please enter your name.</label>
This is valid use of the label tag per HTML5 specification.
But there used to be a WCAG technique that recommended implicit labeling.
That technique is apparently deprecated.
Does this mean that WCAG no longer recommends implicit labeling of form fields?
If so, why?
If anybody knows the background on this, I'd be curious.
-B
--
Work hard. Have fun. Make history.
From: _mallory
Date: Fri, May 06 2016 1:47AM
Subject: Re: Implicit labeling dropped from WCAG?
← Previous message | Next message →
comment inline:
On Thu, May 05, 2016 at 06:55:44PM -0400, Birkir R. Gunnarsson wrote:
> Me and a few colleagues ran into an issue with Voiceover on iOS 9 and
> implicitly labeled radiobuttons.
> For those who do not know, implicit labeling is when you wrap the form
> field to be labeled along with the label text in a label tag, like so:
> <label><input type="text" size="30">Please enter your name.</label>
>
> This is valid use of the label tag per HTML5 specification.
> But there used to be a WCAG technique that recommended implicit labeling.
> That technique is apparently deprecated.
> Does this mean that WCAG no longer recommends implicit labeling of form fields?
> If so, why?
_m: I always told people to avoid it, and use explicit labeling as much as
possible.
IE6 and 7 had problems with them. http://www.standardista.com/ie6-and-ie7-implicit-label-bug/
Of course for most, these browsers are no longer an issue. IE6 also had
problems with for attribute even when you did explicitly link anyway.
Mike Cherim found an intermittant bug with them with Safari and lists
old problems with screen readers (all of these have, so far as I know,
since been fixed) http://green-beast.com/blog/?p%4
And currently, Dragon still doesn't seem to understand them quite right:
(under "Other Notes" heading) http://www.ssbbartgroup.com/blog/dragon-13-aria-support-is-here/
However, despite implicit labels always seeming to screw up one
technology or another, they've always still been recommended along
with explicit, so it's a surprise to me if it's actually been
removed.
cheers,
Mallory
> If anybody knows the background on this, I'd be curious.
> -B
>
> --
> Work hard. Have fun. Make history.
> > > >
From: Birkir R. Gunnarsson
Date: Fri, May 06 2016 2:28AM
Subject: Re: Implicit labeling dropped from WCAG?
← Previous message | Next message →
Works fine with Jaws and NVDA in multiple recent versions of IE and
FF. Think only Voiceover on iOS is not announcing them.
On 5/6/16, _mallory < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> comment inline:
> On Thu, May 05, 2016 at 06:55:44PM -0400, Birkir R. Gunnarsson wrote:
>> Me and a few colleagues ran into an issue with Voiceover on iOS 9 and
>> implicitly labeled radiobuttons.
>> For those who do not know, implicit labeling is when you wrap the form
>> field to be labeled along with the label text in a label tag, like so:
>> <label><input type="text" size="30">Please enter your name.</label>
>>
>> This is valid use of the label tag per HTML5 specification.
>> But there used to be a WCAG technique that recommended implicit labeling.
>> That technique is apparently deprecated.
>> Does this mean that WCAG no longer recommends implicit labeling of form
>> fields?
>> If so, why?
>
> _m: I always told people to avoid it, and use explicit labeling as much as
> possible.
> IE6 and 7 had problems with them.
> http://www.standardista.com/ie6-and-ie7-implicit-label-bug/
> Of course for most, these browsers are no longer an issue. IE6 also had
> problems with for attribute even when you did explicitly link anyway.
>
> Mike Cherim found an intermittant bug with them with Safari and lists
> old problems with screen readers (all of these have, so far as I know,
> since been fixed) http://green-beast.com/blog/?p%4
>
> And currently, Dragon still doesn't seem to understand them quite right:
> (under "Other Notes" heading)
> http://www.ssbbartgroup.com/blog/dragon-13-aria-support-is-here/
>
> However, despite implicit labels always seeming to screw up one
> technology or another, they've always still been recommended along
> with explicit, so it's a surprise to me if it's actually been
> removed.
>
> cheers,
> Mallory
>
>> If anybody knows the background on this, I'd be curious.
>> -B
>>
>> --
>> Work hard. Have fun. Make history.
>> >> >> >> > > > > >
--
Work hard. Have fun. Make history.
From: Steve Faulkner
Date: Fri, May 06 2016 3:32AM
Subject: Re: Implicit labeling dropped from WCAG?
← Previous message | Next message →
On 5 May 2016 at 23:55, Birkir R. Gunnarsson < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
wrote:
> This is valid use of the label tag per HTML5 specification.
Note: it has been a valid use of label since 1999 / HTML4 [1], nothing
changed in this respect in HTML5
[1] https://www.w3.org/TR/html4/interact/forms.html#h-17.9.1
--
Regards
SteveF
Current Standards Work @W3C
<http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/2015/03/current-standards-work-at-w3c/>;
From: Jonathan Avila
Date: Fri, May 06 2016 6:55AM
Subject: Re: Implicit labeling dropped from WCAG?
← Previous message | Next message →
> And currently, Dragon still doesn't seem to understand them quite right:
(under "Other Notes" heading) http://www.ssbbartgroup.com/blog/dragon-13-aria-support-is-here/
Yes, and we've also seen some issues with them on Android with Talkback and Chrome. In some cases it may be necessary to use an implicit label structure (wrapping the element) with explicit for and id mappings.
Jonathan
Jonathan Avila
Chief Accessibility Officer
SSB BART GroupÂ
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
703.637.8957 (Office)
Visit us online: Website | Twitter | Facebook | Linkedin | Blog
Check out our Digital Accessibility Webinars!
-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of _mallory
Sent: Friday, May 06, 2016 3:48 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Implicit labeling dropped from WCAG?
comment inline:
On Thu, May 05, 2016 at 06:55:44PM -0400, Birkir R. Gunnarsson wrote:
> Me and a few colleagues ran into an issue with Voiceover on iOS 9 and
> implicitly labeled radiobuttons.
> For those who do not know, implicit labeling is when you wrap the form
> field to be labeled along with the label text in a label tag, like so:
> <label><input type="text" size="30">Please enter your name.</label>
>
> This is valid use of the label tag per HTML5 specification.
> But there used to be a WCAG technique that recommended implicit labeling.
> That technique is apparently deprecated.
> Does this mean that WCAG no longer recommends implicit labeling of form fields?
> If so, why?
_m: I always told people to avoid it, and use explicit labeling as much as possible.
IE6 and 7 had problems with them. http://www.standardista.com/ie6-and-ie7-implicit-label-bug/
Of course for most, these browsers are no longer an issue. IE6 also had problems with for attribute even when you did explicitly link anyway.
Mike Cherim found an intermittant bug with them with Safari and lists old problems with screen readers (all of these have, so far as I know, since been fixed) http://green-beast.com/blog/?p%4
And currently, Dragon still doesn't seem to understand them quite right:
(under "Other Notes" heading) http://www.ssbbartgroup.com/blog/dragon-13-aria-support-is-here/
However, despite implicit labels always seeming to screw up one technology or another, they've always still been recommended along with explicit, so it's a surprise to me if it's actually been removed.
cheers,
Mallory
> If anybody knows the background on this, I'd be curious.
> -B
>
> --
> Work hard. Have fun. Make history.
> > > archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
>
From: Moore,Michael (Accessibility) (HHSC)
Date: Fri, May 06 2016 7:02AM
Subject: Re: Implicit labeling dropped from WCAG?
← Previous message | Next message →
Since it is valid html and a recognized technique for meeting WCAG then the problem lies either with the browser or with the screen reader. Sounds like its time file a bug report with Apple.
Mike Moore
Accessibility Coordinator
Texas Health and Human Services Commission
Civil Rights Office
(512) 438-3431 (Office)
-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum [mailto: = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = ] On Behalf Of Birkir R. Gunnarsson
Sent: Friday, May 06, 2016 3:28 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Implicit labeling dropped from WCAG?
Works fine with Jaws and NVDA in multiple recent versions of IE and FF. Think only Voiceover on iOS is not announcing them.
On 5/6/16, _mallory < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> comment inline:
> On Thu, May 05, 2016 at 06:55:44PM -0400, Birkir R. Gunnarsson wrote:
>> Me and a few colleagues ran into an issue with Voiceover on iOS 9 and
>> implicitly labeled radiobuttons.
>> For those who do not know, implicit labeling is when you wrap the
>> form field to be labeled along with the label text in a label tag, like so:
>> <label><input type="text" size="30">Please enter your name.</label>
>>
>> This is valid use of the label tag per HTML5 specification.
>> But there used to be a WCAG technique that recommended implicit labeling.
>> That technique is apparently deprecated.
>> Does this mean that WCAG no longer recommends implicit labeling of
>> form fields?
>> If so, why?
>
> _m: I always told people to avoid it, and use explicit labeling as
> much as possible.
> IE6 and 7 had problems with them.
> http://secure-web.cisco.com/1liTnmCDwuyRw_Bv--NpukCsr7sZo7IzM9c9VMVmlh
> e3YIB68w92STdckHng0RcEFhEX4FoJ1vNx0lu86Rnr6OTeDlB1yV7QzHkgOEp2HxBkfT50
> 4PGiEB4pii6W-na6bgrltPS8qNRTWfl-wlErDROU3w0DDMAD0ftmU7Vi22LxFPCKmGAAu7
> QIVUi1JkzpBo8zIMPZubhH3Pkgi6QlpMkzUUZMaJd21OF4PFNFXTVUsdQrWPtJ8Hix6ILT
> eWZnR4l2azlBCnfbG49LKH5bEEn2PqZq9MHb6VRHXChUu1ZJ6FlobIw6xd1s_Xvj1kOWwM
> M7CV6sngGlQUXQB4M04efKuwPbdmQxd-P3XgwNbqxfBQVO82UyTJAFbz4tPyw4A/http%3
> A%2F%2Fwww.standardista.com%2Fie6-and-ie7-implicit-label-bug%2F
> Of course for most, these browsers are no longer an issue. IE6 also
> had problems with for attribute even when you did explicitly link anyway.
>
> Mike Cherim found an intermittant bug with them with Safari and lists
> old problems with screen readers (all of these have, so far as I know,
> since been fixed) http://green-beast.com/blog/?p%4
>
> And currently, Dragon still doesn't seem to understand them quite right:
> (under "Other Notes" heading)
> http://www.ssbbartgroup.com/blog/dragon-13-aria-support-is-here/
>
> However, despite implicit labels always seeming to screw up one
> technology or another, they've always still been recommended along
> with explicit, so it's a surprise to me if it's actually been removed.
>
> cheers,
> Mallory
>
>> If anybody knows the background on this, I'd be curious.
>> -B
>>
>> --
>> Work hard. Have fun. Make history.
>> >> >> archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
>> > > > archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
> >
--
Work hard. Have fun. Make history.
From: Steve Faulkner
Date: Fri, May 06 2016 7:06AM
Subject: Re: Implicit labeling dropped from WCAG?
← Previous message | Next message →
A general comment, referring to this method as 'implicit' may infer
something that is untrue. In terms of exposing the accessible name to
accessibility APIs either method works. i.e. an input's accessible name is
provided and exposed by the browser. The IE issue was a bug and got fixed,
the dragon issue is an ongoing major bug in dragon not using the
standardised accessibility APIs
--
Regards
SteveF
Current Standards Work @W3C
<http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/2015/03/current-standards-work-at-w3c/>;
On 5 May 2016 at 23:55, Birkir R. Gunnarsson < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
wrote:
> Me and a few colleagues ran into an issue with Voiceover on iOS 9 and
> implicitly labeled radiobuttons.
> For those who do not know, implicit labeling is when you wrap the form
> field to be labeled along with the label text in a label tag, like so:
> <label><input type="text" size="30">Please enter your name.</label>
>
> This is valid use of the label tag per HTML5 specification.
> But there used to be a WCAG technique that recommended implicit labeling.
> That technique is apparently deprecated.
> Does this mean that WCAG no longer recommends implicit labeling of form
> fields?
> If so, why?
> If anybody knows the background on this, I'd be curious.
> -B
>
> --
> Work hard. Have fun. Make history.
> > > > >
From: Sailesh Panchang
Date: Fri, May 06 2016 7:18AM
Subject: Re: Implicit labeling dropped from WCAG?
← Previous message | Next message →
Implicit labelling has been acceptable but UA support has been flaky.
But on Windows for past few years with screen readers it works just
fine. One can also click the label to have the control focused.
In WCAG1, there is a checkpoint 10.2
 Until user agents support explicit associations between labels and
form controls, for all form controls with implicitly associated
labels, ensure that the label is properly positioned.
So it has always been valid. In HTML5 specs, all form related examples
use this method.
Sailesh
On 5/6/16, Steve Faulkner < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> A general comment, referring to this method as 'implicit' may infer
> something that is untrue. In terms of exposing the accessible name to
> accessibility APIs either method works. i.e. an input's accessible name is
> provided and exposed by the browser. The IE issue was a bug and got fixed,
> the dragon issue is an ongoing major bug in dragon not using the
> standardised accessibility APIs
>
> --
>
> Regards
>
> SteveF
> Current Standards Work @W3C
> <http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/2015/03/current-standards-work-at-w3c/>;
>
> On 5 May 2016 at 23:55, Birkir R. Gunnarsson < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> wrote:
>
>> Me and a few colleagues ran into an issue with Voiceover on iOS 9 and
>> implicitly labeled radiobuttons.
>> For those who do not know, implicit labeling is when you wrap the form
>> field to be labeled along with the label text in a label tag, like so:
>> <label><input type="text" size="30">Please enter your name.</label>
>>
>> This is valid use of the label tag per HTML5 specification.
>> But there used to be a WCAG technique that recommended implicit labeling.
>> That technique is apparently deprecated.
>> Does this mean that WCAG no longer recommends implicit labeling of form
>> fields?
>> If so, why?
>> If anybody knows the background on this, I'd be curious.
>> -B
>>
>> --
>> Work hard. Have fun. Make history.
>> >> >> >> >>
> > > > >
From: Birkir R. Gunnarsson
Date: Fri, May 06 2016 7:23AM
Subject: Re: Implicit labeling dropped from WCAG?
← Previous message | Next message →
I agree with you guys, except for the fact that it is no longer, at
least not officially, an official WCAG technique. That is the thing
that surprised me the most.
recognized
This 2005 document (as old as the hills, at least in terms of
accessibility on the web)advises against using implicit labeling?
https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-WCAG20-HTML-TECHS-20050211/#label-implicit
This technique is depricated, true, but the latest version of WCAG
does not have an advisory technique for implicit labeling, which is
kind of funny.
On 5/6/16, Steve Faulkner < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> A general comment, referring to this method as 'implicit' may infer
> something that is untrue. In terms of exposing the accessible name to
> accessibility APIs either method works. i.e. an input's accessible name is
> provided and exposed by the browser. The IE issue was a bug and got fixed,
> the dragon issue is an ongoing major bug in dragon not using the
> standardised accessibility APIs
>
> --
>
> Regards
>
> SteveF
> Current Standards Work @W3C
> <http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/2015/03/current-standards-work-at-w3c/>;
>
> On 5 May 2016 at 23:55, Birkir R. Gunnarsson < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> wrote:
>
>> Me and a few colleagues ran into an issue with Voiceover on iOS 9 and
>> implicitly labeled radiobuttons.
>> For those who do not know, implicit labeling is when you wrap the form
>> field to be labeled along with the label text in a label tag, like so:
>> <label><input type="text" size="30">Please enter your name.</label>
>>
>> This is valid use of the label tag per HTML5 specification.
>> But there used to be a WCAG technique that recommended implicit labeling.
>> That technique is apparently deprecated.
>> Does this mean that WCAG no longer recommends implicit labeling of form
>> fields?
>> If so, why?
>> If anybody knows the background on this, I'd be curious.
>> -B
>>
>> --
>> Work hard. Have fun. Make history.
>> >> >> >> >>
> > > > >
--
Work hard. Have fun. Make history.
From: _mallory
Date: Fri, May 06 2016 10:10AM
Subject: Re: Implicit labeling dropped from WCAG?
← Previous message | Next message →
On Fri, May 06, 2016 at 10:32:49AM +0100, Steve Faulkner wrote:
> On 5 May 2016 at 23:55, Birkir R. Gunnarsson < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> wrote:
>
> > This is valid use of the label tag per HTML5 specification.
>
>
> Note: it has been a valid use of label since 1999 / HTML4 [1], nothing
> changed in this respect in HTML5
There are two ages-old valid ways, it's just that one has consistently
messed someone up and the other hasn't. Since the other is also
equally valid, I stick to the one that has worked more consistently.
It's a personal thing but it's also got reasons.
Yes, Dragon's issue is a *bug*, my only point is that there always
seems to be someone's bug, somewhere, making things a pain in the
butt. So I just drive around that one and I don't poke it with a
stick.
_mallory
From: James Nurthen
Date: Fri, May 06 2016 12:12PM
Subject: Re: Implicit labeling dropped from WCAG?
← Previous message | No next message
I wish there were a way to delete W3C documents completely. I shudder at
the thought of someone referencing that ancient working draft doc thinking
they were doing the right thing.
Regards,
james
On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 6:23 AM, Birkir R. Gunnarsson <
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> I agree with you guys, except for the fact that it is no longer, at
> least not officially, an official WCAG technique. That is the thing
> that surprised me the most.
> recognized
> This 2005 document (as old as the hills, at least in terms of
> accessibility on the web)advises against using implicit labeling?
>
>
> https://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/WCAG20/WD-WCAG20-HTML-TECHS-20050211/#label-implicit
> This technique is depricated, true, but the latest version of WCAG
> does not have an advisory technique for implicit labeling, which is
> kind of funny.
>
>
>
> On 5/6/16, Steve Faulkner < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> > A general comment, referring to this method as 'implicit' may infer
> > something that is untrue. In terms of exposing the accessible name to
> > accessibility APIs either method works. i.e. an input's accessible name
> is
> > provided and exposed by the browser. The IE issue was a bug and got
> fixed,
> > the dragon issue is an ongoing major bug in dragon not using the
> > standardised accessibility APIs
> >
> > --
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > SteveF
> > Current Standards Work @W3C
> > <
> http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/2015/03/current-standards-work-at-w3c/>;
> >
> > On 5 May 2016 at 23:55, Birkir R. Gunnarsson <
> = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Me and a few colleagues ran into an issue with Voiceover on iOS 9 and
> >> implicitly labeled radiobuttons.
> >> For those who do not know, implicit labeling is when you wrap the form
> >> field to be labeled along with the label text in a label tag, like so:
> >> <label><input type="text" size="30">Please enter your name.</label>
> >>
> >> This is valid use of the label tag per HTML5 specification.
> >> But there used to be a WCAG technique that recommended implicit
> labeling.
> >> That technique is apparently deprecated.
> >> Does this mean that WCAG no longer recommends implicit labeling of form
> >> fields?
> >> If so, why?
> >> If anybody knows the background on this, I'd be curious.
> >> -B
> >>
> >> --
> >> Work hard. Have fun. Make history.
> >> > >> > >> > >> > >>
> > > > > > > > > >
>
>
> --
> Work hard. Have fun. Make history.
> > > > >