W3C

Site Navigation

Nearby

Results of Questionnaire ACT TF - Rule Review: autocomplete attribute has valid value

The results of this questionnaire are available to anybody. In addition, answers are sent to the following email addresses: team-wcag-act-surveys@w3.org,maryjom@us.ibm.com,wilco.fiers@deque.com

This questionnaire was open from 2020-10-06 to 2020-10-29.

5 answers have been received.

Jump to results for question:

  1. Instructions
  2. Consistency with ACT Rules Format
  3. Rule assumptions
  4. Implementation data
  5. Consistent with accessibility requirements
  6. Remaining open issues
  7. Other questions or concerns
  8. Rule is up-to-date
  9. Readiness for publishing

1. Instructions

Review the rule autocomplete has valid value and answer the questions in this survey.

If there are issues with the rule, you may either open an issue in GitHub or provide details in the entry fields for the applicable question.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results

Details

Responder Instructions
Wilco Fiers
Levon Spradlin
Kathy Eng
Trevor Bostic
Mary Jo Mueller

2. Consistency with ACT Rules Format

Does the rule follow the ACT Rules Format 1.0?

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Yes 5
No. I have opened an issue in GitHub or have documented my comments below.
I don't know. My questions are documented below.

Details

Responder Consistency with ACT Rules FormatComments
Wilco Fiers Yes
Levon Spradlin Yes
Kathy Eng Yes
Trevor Bostic Yes
Mary Jo Mueller Yes

3. Rule assumptions

Are the assumptions acceptable?

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Yes 3
No. I have opened an issue in GitHub or have documented my comments below.
I don't know. My questions are documented below. 2

Details

Responder Rule assumptionsComments
Wilco Fiers Yes
Levon Spradlin Yes
Kathy Eng I don't know. My questions are documented below. Not clear on second assumption - it seems form fields that do not collect information about the user shouldn't or wouldn't have autocomplete. Is this assumption necessary given the first assumption that when autocomplete is present, it is collecting info about the user?
Trevor Bostic Yes
Mary Jo Mueller I don't know. My questions are documented below. Seems the 2nd paragraph in the assumptions indicate it is assumed this rule will produce false positives. For the last paragraph, the last sentence is not super-clear to me. If you qualify "If this is not the case" it would be clearer. I can't tell if the statement is indicating "If aria-disabled state is not used" or "if aria-disabled is used but the element is still operable". When you have a complex statement followed by a statement using "this" it is hard to parse if all of the things from the previous statement need to be true or some.

4. Implementation data

Is the implementation data correct?

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Yes 4
No. I have opened an issue in GitHub or have documented my comments below.
I don't know. My questions or comments are documented below. 1

Details

Responder Implementation dataComments
Wilco Fiers Yes
Levon Spradlin Yes
Kathy Eng I don't know. My questions or comments are documented below. Passed 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 examples need more visible label info to confirm that the optional tokens in the the attribute values are correct.
Trevor Bostic Yes
Mary Jo Mueller Yes

5. Consistent with accessibility requirements

Is the rule consistent with existing accessibility standards (e.g. WCAG, ARIA, etc.)?

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Yes 5
No. I have opened an issue in GitHub or have documented my comments below.
I don't know. My questions or comments are documented below.

Details

Responder Consistent with accessibility requirementsComments
Wilco Fiers Yes
Levon Spradlin Yes
Kathy Eng Yes
Trevor Bostic Yes
Mary Jo Mueller Yes

6. Remaining open issues

Are there any remaining open issues for this rule that were opened prior to this review?

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Yes there are open issues that need to be resolved. I have listed them below.
Yes, there are open issues but they don't need to be resolved for the rule to be published.
No, there are no open issues. 4

(1 response didn't contain an answer to this question)

Details

Responder Remaining open issuesComments
Wilco Fiers
Levon Spradlin No, there are no open issues.
Kathy Eng No, there are no open issues.
Trevor Bostic No, there are no open issues.
Mary Jo Mueller No, there are no open issues.

7. Other questions or concerns

Do you have any further questions or concerns about this rule?

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Yes, I have questions or concerns, described below. 1
No, I have no further questions or concerns. 4

Details

Responder Other questions or concernsComments
Wilco Fiers Yes, I have questions or concerns, described below. The rule does not account for different types of disabled elements. Only the aria-disabled attribute. Inapplicable example 6 seems like it should be a pass instead.

- I'm not too keen on passed example 8. Can we find a better role for this?
Levon Spradlin No, I have no further questions or concerns.
Kathy Eng No, I have no further questions or concerns.
Trevor Bostic No, I have no further questions or concerns.
Mary Jo Mueller No, I have no further questions or concerns. Seems like Passed example 8 should be inapplicable since the widget role is no longer an input - it is overridden by ARIA but not as an input, select or textarea.

8. Rule is up-to-date

Is the rule up to date? If so, the accessibility support should still be relevant, it should follow the recommended writing style, and use up to date links.

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Yes, all information is up-to-date. 5
No, it needs the following changes.
I don't know, but I have the following concerns.

Details

Responder Rule is up-to-dateComments
Wilco Fiers Yes, all information is up-to-date.
Levon Spradlin Yes, all information is up-to-date.
Kathy Eng Yes, all information is up-to-date.
Trevor Bostic Yes, all information is up-to-date.
Mary Jo Mueller Yes, all information is up-to-date.

9. Readiness for publishing

Do you think this rule is ready to be published?

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Yes, it is ready to publish as-is. 2
Yes, it is ready to publish with the following changes.
No, it is not ready to publish and the reason is documented below. 3

Details

Responder Readiness for publishingComments
Wilco Fiers No, it is not ready to publish and the reason is documented below.
Levon Spradlin Yes, it is ready to publish as-is.
Kathy Eng No, it is not ready to publish and the reason is documented below. See comment on the passed examples
Trevor Bostic Yes, it is ready to publish as-is.
Mary Jo Mueller No, it is not ready to publish and the reason is documented below. Seems like there's a few issues to clear up before this can publish.

More details on responses

  • Levon Spradlin: last responded on 16, October 2020 at 21:01 (UTC)
  • Kathy Eng: last responded on 22, October 2020 at 02:02 (UTC)
  • Trevor Bostic: last responded on 22, October 2020 at 12:28 (UTC)
  • Mary Jo Mueller: last responded on 28, October 2020 at 22:45 (UTC)

Non-responders

The following persons have not answered the questionnaire:

  1. Katie Haritos-Shea
  2. David MacDonald
  3. Romain Deltour
  4. Detlev Fischer
  5. Chris Loiselle
  6. Jonathan Avila
  7. Rachael Bradley Montgomery
  8. Charles Adams
  9. Daniel Montalvo
  10. Todd Libby
  11. Thomas Brunet
  12. Catherine Droege
  13. Suji Sreerama
  14. Shane Dittmar
  15. Nayan Padrai

Send an email to all the non-responders.

Compact view of the results / list of email addresses of the responders

WBS home / Questionnaires / WG questionnaires / Answer this questionnaire

Report issues on GitHub project w3c/wbs-design or by mail to sysreq.