Thread Subject: Re: Gaps in Webrequirements -errorhandlingtechniques
This archival content is maintained by WebAIM and NCDAE on behalf of TEITAC and the U.S. Access Board . Additional details on the updates to section 508 and section 255 can be found at the Access Board web site.
From: Andi Snow-Weaver
Date: Wed, Jan 10 2007 10:15 AM
- Return to this mailing list's archives
- View all messages in this thread
- Next message in thread: David Poehlman: "Re: Gaps in Webrequirements -error handlingtechniques"
- Previous message in thread: Sean Hayes: "Re: Gaps in Webrequirements -error handlingtechniques"
- Messages sorted by: Author | Thread | Date
The idea of the Web author providing a means to skip directly to the field
in error is analogous to the "skip to main content" link. This seemed like
a good idea at the time but in our discussions in this subcommittee, we
have determined that it is not a good idea and doesn't even work in some
browsers. So I don't think we should now be advocating for it for error
It seems that if the AT could get the right semantic information as to
which fields are in error, it could provide a means for the user to
navigate directly to them. As part of the W3C ARIA work, new attributes are
being proposed for form fields. Two that I am aware of are the "required"
attribute and the "invalid" attribute. So forms developers can indicate
which form fields are required and which ones are in error. Isn't providing
semantic information a better way to approach this issue?
- Next message in Thread: David Poehlman: "Re: Gaps in Webrequirements -error handlingtechniques"
- Previous message in Thread: Sean Hayes: "Re: Gaps in Webrequirements -error handlingtechniques"