WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Are fieldset and legend still relevant?


From: Jonathan Avila
Date: Dec 30, 2014 7:52PM

> by scripting. In my opinion, scriptin should be the exception, not the rule for making technology accessible. As Thomas said, test to the nstandards and guidelines.

While I agree that we shouldn't be measuring against specific ATs -- techniques have to be practical -- that is, they have to be accessibility supported. This assertion is in place to prevent developers from creating some framework that exposes information or makes a claim to expose information in programmatic ways but the ways are not practically usable by AT. For example, I could claim that divs on my webpage use the title attribute to expose information to screen reader users. In reality a title attribute on a div is not reasonable way of exposing information at this time so the community has determined that a technique such as this is not a sufficient technique.


-----Original Message-----
From: <EMAIL REMOVED> [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Joy Relton
Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2014 2:38 PM
To: 'WebAIM Discussion List'
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Are fieldset and legend still relevant?


I agree with you. The AT companies often do a great job, when they miss the mark or things don't work we should bring this to their attention. I'm glad to see that fewer AT vendors are attempting to solve the problems by scripting. In my opinion, scriptin should be the exception, not the rule for making technology accessible. As Thomas said, test to the nstandards and guidelines.
-----Original Message-----
From: <EMAIL REMOVED> [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Lynn Holdsworth
Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2014 10:35 AM
To: WebAIM Discussion List
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Are fieldset and legend still relevant?

Hi Thomas,

I guess I've been conflating testing with development. I'm both a tester and dev, and I tend to do that. Apologies for any confusion.

If something works with most AT in its out-of-the-box state, but not with one slightly tweaked popular AT, I don't think it would do any harm to recommend to developers a few changes that would make it work for more people.

Kind regards, Lynn

On 30/12/2014, Thomas McKeithan II < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
> I concur with Joy. We should determine conformance to the standards
> basd upon how the page is coded and not how a specific AT Tool
> behavors. For years I've advocated fot testing using AT Tools with the "out of the Box"
> settings rather than customizations.
> Respectfully,
> Thomas Lee McKeithan II
> http://www.qssinc.com
> 508 SME, SSQA Solutions Center
> 10480 Little Patuxent Pkwy , Suite 350 Columbia , MD 21044
> (301 )977-7884 x1058 (Work)
> (202) 276-6437 (Cell)
> This electronic mail (including any attachments) may contain
> information that is privileged, confidential, and/or otherwise
> protected from disclosure to anyone other than its intended
> recipient(s). Any dissemination or use of this electronic email or its
> contents (including any attachments) by persons other than the
> intended recipient(s) is strictly prohibited. If you have received
> this message in error, please notify the sender by reply email and delete the original message (including any attachments) in its entirety.
> -----Original Message-----
> [mailto: <EMAIL REMOVED> ] On Behalf Of Lynn
> Holdsworth
> Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2014 8:21 AM
> To: WebAIM Discussion List
> Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Are fieldset and legend still relevant?
> Hi Joy,
> Thanks for your comments and the good points you make.
> I believe the user is King and we should do everything possible to get
> as close to total inclusivity as we can.
> I take your point that it's frustrating to have to code for one group
> of users whose AT is set to a particular setting. But I would guess
> that a significant enough number of people are using JAWS with
> intermediate or advanced verbosity settings to make that bit of extra effort worthwhile.
> Does the WebAIM survey collect data on verbosity settings? If not it
> might be worth considering this for next year's survey.
> Thanks, Lynn
> On 30/12/2014, Lynn Holdsworth < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>> Hi Birkir,
>> Sorry, I should have made myself clearer. I'm not advocating using
>> invisible labels, but rather using ARIA-LABELLEDBY to associate a
>> form field with a piece of text that's visible somewhere appropriate
>> on the page.
>> I've knocked up some examples. With JAWS 15 set to advanced
>> verbosity, the second and third examples work beautifully, while in
>> the first the "Gender" label is ignored.
>> http://behindtheyellowline.org.uk/labelledby.htm
>> (Excuse any validation errors - quick turn-around time and all that!)
>> I'll try these with NVDA and VoiceOver when I get a moment, and may
>> create some more complex examples to illustrate what I'm trying to
>> achieve.
>> But for now, would fieldset and legend alone cover WCAG2?
>> Thanks, Lynn
>> On 30/12/2014, Birkir R. Gunnarsson < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>>> Hi Lynn
>>> It depends how you construct the aria-label I would say.
>>> The relevant pieces of info user needs to ahve access to are the
>>> labels for the individual fields as well as the common label for the
>>> group of fields.
>>> How would you code a gender radiobutton set for instance?
>>> User would want to hear
>>> "gender male"
>>> "gender female"
>>> or at least hear the word "gender" on the first radiobutton, the one
>>> that has focus, right?
>>> Generally I would recommend fieldset with legend "gender" and two
>>> radiobuttons labeled "male" and "female".
>>> If for whatever reason that is not possible I would just construct
>>> an aria group.
>>> <div role="group" aria-labelledby="gender">
>>> <h3 id="gender">Gender</h3>
>>> <label for "gm">Male</label>
>>> <input type="radio" name="rbgender" id="gm"> <label for
>>> "gm=f">Female</label> <input type="radio" name="rbgender" id="gf">
>>> </div>
>>> You could construct an aria-label and add the legend text to one or
>>> more of the radiobuttons.
>>> It would communicate the same info.
>>> The risk with aria-labels in general is that they are invisible and
>>> I often see developers being sloppy and making typos that do not get
>>> caught by their QA teams.
>>> I think the Jaws setting is honestly a bit weird.
>>> Users can be extra super power users with Jaws, but they still
>>> cannot guess what a common legend for a fieldset or a tooltip is on
>>> a page (aria-describedby values are not read by Jaws with verbosity
>>> set to "advanced").
>>> The verbosity setting is not even set for the browser specifically,
>>> it is the global setting.
>>> I think FS should fix this.
>>> I digress. ;)
>>> In short, yes, fieldset/legends are still important to me, though
>>> there are ways one could work around it and code the legend into the
>>> labels.
>>> Cheers
>>> On 12/30/14, Lynn Holdsworth < <EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:
>>>> Hi all,
>>>> I'm just going through WebAIM's invaluable list of checkpoints, and
>>>> found this one under 1.3.1: Info and relationships:
>>>> * Text labels are associated with form input elements. Related form
>>>> elements are grouped with fieldset/legend.
>>>> Rather than using fieldset and legend to group form elements, for a
>>>> while now I've been using CSS and ARIA labels.
>>>> Fieldsets were always pretty flaky with screenreaders. I have my
>>>> JAWS setting set to advanced, and so legends don't get read out as
>>>> I tab through the elements inside a fieldset. But ARIA labels do.
>>>> And they get read out in the order that the developer deems most sensible.
>>>> If I use both legends and ARIA labels, some users must listen to
>>>> the labels twice, sometimes once before and once after the info
>>>> about the element with focus, which could get pretty confusing for beginners.
>>>> I'd love to hear your thoughts on this one.
>>>> Cheers, Lynn
>>>> >>>> >>>> list messages to <EMAIL REMOVED>
>>> --
>>> Work hard. Have fun. Make history.
>>> >>> >>> list messages to <EMAIL REMOVED>
> > > list messages to <EMAIL REMOVED>
> > > list messages to <EMAIL REMOVED>