WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Relating answer options to their question

for

From: Jared Smith
Date: Aug 31, 2018 10:50AM

Birkir -

Thanks for your thoughts on this. I agree that aria-describedby could
be a 3rd option, though with the repetition issues you describe. This
repetition, however, could not as easily be addressed at the AT level
like it could for fieldset/legend or radiogroup.

> As to your last question, I'd say that a legend is insufficient as a label for a form control.

The question wasn't really whether legend is sufficient as a label,
but whether legend alone is sufficient to meet 1.3.1.

> a legend does not translate to an accessible name for the checkbox,
> only the <label> element (implicit or explicit) or the title attribute
> can be used to assign an accessible name to a checkbox (or
> aria-label/aria-labelledby of course). You can check the accessible
> name and description algorithm for details .

Right, but WCAG 1.3.1 does not require an accessible name or a label.
It only requires that the "information, structure, and relationships
conveyed through presentation can be programmatically determined or
are available in text." I can certainly argue that putting a text box
in a fieldset provides a programmatic relationship. If it didn't then
it would also be insufficient for a grouping of radio buttons, right?
The legend also makes the information "available in text". Would this
not be sufficient to meet 1.3.1?

We would, of course, recommend fieldset/legend in this case, but it
does, I think, pose an interesting WCAG interpretation question - and
one that's currently very acute for one of our clients.

Thanks,

Jared