WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: WCAG 2.1 - 1.3.5 - How to capture a violation?

for

From: Jared Smith
Date: Jul 27, 2018 2:43PM

Jeremy -

I absolutely agree. In cases where the purpose of the field is
ambiguous, using autocomplete is incredibly helpful and should be
required.

But the same software that parses autocomplete="family-name" already
knows that <label>Last Name: <input type="text"></label> is the same
thing, and thus provides identical functionality when you request help
in completing this field? Does it then make sense to require authors
to add the autocomplete attribute if it provides no better
accessibility?

I'd think it worthwhile to examine this further as a possible
sufficient technique, though recognize that this would rely on authors
to provide an equivalent label text that is "accessibility supported"
by form fillers (something much more difficult to define than the
blanket "autocomplete is required").

I have considered the scenario where the input is for entering someone
else's last name. In this case, autocomplete would not be used, yet
the form filler would, if activated erroneously, fill it with the
user's last name. But this is the current reality anyway. The form
fillers already use form labels in their heuristics if autocomplete
isn't present (and perhaps even if it is). The only way to avoid this
potential issue is for form fillers to ONLY respect @autocomplete, and
that certainly is not going to happen - they'd stop working on nearly
all web forms (including the ones that passed 2.0, but now fail 2.1
without having changed).

Thanks,

Jared