WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Placeholder and Accessible Name Computation

for

From: Jonathan Avila
Date: May 8, 2019 2:40PM

Hi Detlev,

Whether it counts as an accessible name under SC 4.1.2 is a different question from SC 3.3.2 which is aimed at visual labels and instructions that are present to all users.

Jonathan

-----Original Message-----
From: WebAIM-Forum < <EMAIL REMOVED> > On Behalf Of Detlev Fischer
Sent: Wednesday, May 8, 2019 4:26 PM
To: WebAIM Discussion List < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Placeholder and Accessible Name Computation

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.


@Jon Avila - I fully agree - my point was just to get clarity on the normative situation (would using placeholder PASS 3.3.2 while not being recommendable)

Sent from phone

> Am 08.05.2019 um 21:50 schrieb Patrick H. Lauke < <EMAIL REMOVED> >:
>
>> On 08/05/2019 20:34, Jonathan Avila wrote:
>> I am generally opposed to the placeholder being used as the accessible name because I believe it will lead to the sole use of it as an accepted way of providing a name rather than a fallback. The placeholder should not act as a label and should act as a hint. By including it in the name it encourages it's acceptance as a label rather than a placeholder. It's called placeholder for a reason and not a label.
>
> For what it's worth, an input relying purely on placeholder will still fail "Labels and Instructions" (because once filled in there's no more "label or instruction" there at all) and arguably "Label in Name" (again, once filled in, it has no apparent label but just its entered value, and that's not part of the accessible name).
>
> P
> --
> Patrick H. Lauke
>
> www.splintered.co.uk | https://github.com/patrickhlauke
> http://flickr.com/photos/redux/ | http://redux.deviantart.com
> twitter: @patrick_h_lauke | skype: patrick_h_lauke
> > > archives at http://webaim.org/discussion/archives
>