E-mail List Archives
Thread: required fields for log in pages
Number of posts in this thread: 3 (In chronological order)
From: Greg Kraus
Date: Tue, Aug 05 2014 3:57PM
Subject: required fields for log in pages
No previous message | Next message →
This seems like a silly question, but it got me to thinking. Why don't
login pages indicate that the user name and password fields are
required? I went to several sites that would probably say they are
quite accessible, and none of them with login functionality indicated
that the fields were required.
I don't read anything in WCAG 2 that would allow for login pages as an
exclusion, unless I'm missing something. Is it just that we all know
by now that the fields will be required? Is it a bad habit that we've
all gotten into?
Just curious.
Greg
--
Greg Kraus
University IT Accessibility Coordinator
NC State University
919.513.4087
= EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED =
http://go.ncsu.edu/itaccess
From: Jared Smith
Date: Tue, Aug 05 2014 4:14PM
Subject: Re: required fields for log in pages
← Previous message | Next message →
Greg Kraus wrote:
> Is it just that we all know by now that the fields will be required?
This. It's a well known convention that in order to log in you must
provide both your username and password. Indicating that these are
required isn't necessary.
One might similarly ask whether you should mark a Search field as
being required seeing as the only way to get an effective search
result is to put something in the text field. I don't think it's
necessary because it's obvious.
I don't think WCAG requires that you indicate required fields as being
such, at least not before the error identification stage (SC 3.3.1).
WCAG does, however, require that if there is a visual indication that
a field is required that this information be made accessible.
Jared
From: Lucy Greco
Date: Tue, Aug 05 2014 4:38PM
Subject: Re: required fields for log in pages
← Previous message | No next message
hello: i know of two situations in witch it is not required to fill in user
name and pass word.
one on a tool we use here on campus. the user name is the only field that
is required because if you enter the pass word it does the wrong thing.
the user must enter there e-mail address and then be given an alternative
log in page once they submit the application log in. so yes its in
portent noting that in some cases the user name/e-mail address is required
and not the password.
the other case i know of is i have dealt in other applications wair if
you leave the search field empty it brings up a set of sertchs set to your
profile so you can use a empty sertch feald. so i think it should be a
fail if there is a situachtion wair non standered interaction happens like
these to that the required fealds are marked. not a dumb questen at all.
On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 3:14 PM, Jared Smith < = EMAIL ADDRESS REMOVED = > wrote:
> Greg Kraus wrote:
> > Is it just that we all know by now that the fields will be required?
>
> This. It's a well known convention that in order to log in you must
> provide both your username and password. Indicating that these are
> required isn't necessary.
>
> One might similarly ask whether you should mark a Search field as
> being required seeing as the only way to get an effective search
> result is to put something in the text field. I don't think it's
> necessary because it's obvious.
>
> I don't think WCAG requires that you indicate required fields as being
> such, at least not before the error identification stage (SC 3.3.1).
> WCAG does, however, require that if there is a visual indication that
> a field is required that this information be made accessible.
>
> Jared
> > > >
--
Lucia Greco
Web Accessibility Evangelist
IST - Architecture, Platforms, and Integration
University of California, Berkeley
(510) 289-6008 skype: lucia1-greco
http://webaccess.berkeley.edu
Follow me on twitter @accessaces