WebAIM - Web Accessibility In Mind

E-mail List Archives

Re: Does every field need a label in this instance?

for

From: Jonathan Whiting
Date: Feb 7, 2023 10:17AM

WCAG 2 checklist says: 2.4.6 Headings and Labels - "Page headings and labels for form and interactive controls are informative. Avoid duplicating heading (e.g., "More Details") or label text (e.g., "First Name") unless the structure provides adequate differentiation between them."

For me this says that every field should have its own unique label. But I might misinterpret it. What do you think?
In this case, I think the last part of what it says in the checklist is important: "unless the structure provides adequate differentiation between them."

A table is a great example of an element that can provide this structure. The single label serves as a visible label for multiple fields and the structure of the table makes it clear that fields are repeated in multiple columns or rows. Screen reader users will also get this information if the table is structured correctly. Glen shared a WebAIM article with an example of this: https://webaim.org/techniques/forms/advanced#multiple. (It also outlines how aria-labelledby can be used to present this information to screen reader users.)

This structure does not fail WCAG SC 2.4.6 because SC 2.4.6 doesn't require that every form control have a unique label. It doesn't even require a label (SC 3.3.2 does). It requires that "labels [if present] describe topic or purpose." A single label can describe the topic or purpose of multiple fields.

David said:
Yah, to me, as a screen reader user I require unique and concise labels on each element to access a form with equality to my sighted peers.
I think it's good to distinguish personal preference from WCAG requirements. WCAG requires descriptive labels, but it does not require that every label be unique.

I think there would be times when "equality with [your] sighted peers" would mean that the label is not unique. In the table example described above, the experience for a signed user is a repeated label, plus a table. I think this is what you would want to convey to screen reader users.

Best,
Jon

Jonathan Whiting
Director of Training, WebAIM


From: WebAIM-Forum < <EMAIL REMOVED> > on behalf of Bettina Szekany < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
Sent: Saturday, February 4, 2023 11:18 PM
To: WebAIM Discussion List < <EMAIL REMOVED> >
Subject: Re: [WebAIM] Does every field need a label in this instance?

Dear David,

Thank you so much for your elaborate reply.
The quote I've asked clarification for comes from the webaim WCAG 2
checklist.
https://webaim.org/standards/wcag/checklist

There's no argument about that at the backend every single fiels should be
labeleb for screen readers - now I also understand that fields need unique
labeling. I'm really thankful for your explaination!

The concer is rather the visual clutter that visible labels will bring upon
and how does it influence the overall usability and experience.

Kindly,
Bettina


On Sun, Feb 5, 2023, 06:58 David Engebretson Jr. <
<EMAIL REMOVED> > wrote:

> Yah, to me, as a screen reader user I require unique and concise labels on
> each element to access a form with equality to my sighted peers. Plus, it's
> just good practice to have unique id's on each element so that you can
> bring a user back to a field that might have an error on it when they
> submit invalid data.
>
> To me, as an accessibility professional, I would fail a form if there
> weren't unique id's on each element in the form. Even a unique identifier
> such as "Name001" or "Name100" would be better than naming them all the
> same, in my humble opinion.
>
> Plus, I've learned to not always trust information from blogs. Dig into
> the WAI (Web Accessibility Initiative) and the WCAG (Web Content
> Accessibility Guidelines) from w3.org for the objective truth regarding
> questions and compliance concerns you might have about digital
> accessibility techniques in design and remediation is going to lead you
> towards honest and well thought out solutions. The w3 is probably a better
> source than what you might find in a google search that guides you to
> vendors looking for your business and/or blogs that might inadvertently
> post recommendations that aren't always well thought through or written.
> The WAI and WCAG documentation might not always be correct because we all
> make mistakes, but those folks are the closest to the objective truth you
> will find. If you analyze a problem in the documentation and guidance of
> any w3.org sponsored page then I'm certain they would be very
> appreciative of your feedback so the documentation isn't confusing to other
> folks who are most certainly experiencing similar issues to yours.
>
> One other thing to keep in mind is that assistive technologies, browsers,
> and operating systems are always changing. In my opinion there is almost no
> way to ensure all people will have equitable access to all digital
> technologies with the ever growing pace of change in the digital
> technologies field and the ever growing population of humans with unique
> needs like I have as someone who relies on assistive technology for
> equitable access. The ever growing population and ever changing
> technologies are great for us as digital technologies accessibility
> professionals for longevity in our chosen career, but the less technically
> oriented human might wonder why there isn't a simple solution to user
> experiences that are less than accessible.
>
> Simple, universally usable, WCAG compliant, and consistent design of
> digital technologies is the best place to start in my opinion.
>
> Keep following the WCAG guidelines and maybe, someday, we'll get closer to
> a solution. I sure hope so! That's what I'm aiming for.
>
> Cheers,
> David
>
> > > > >