W3C

Site Navigation

Nearby

Results of Questionnaire ACT TF - Rule Review: Visible label is part of accessible name

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 2020-09-09 to 2020-09-24.

6 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. Readiness for publishing

1. Instructions

Review the rule Visible label is part of accessible name and answer the questions in this survey. If there are issues with the rule, 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
Trevor Bostic
Levon Spradlin
Mary Jo Mueller
Kathy Eng
Maureen Kraft

2. Consistency with ACT Rules Format

Does the rule follow the ACT Rules Format 1.0?

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Yes 6
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
Trevor Bostic Yes
Levon Spradlin Yes
Mary Jo Mueller Yes
Kathy Eng Yes
Maureen Kraft Yes

3. Rule assumptions

Are the assumptions acceptable?

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Yes 6
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 Rule assumptionsComments
Wilco Fiers Yes
Trevor Bostic Yes
Levon Spradlin Yes
Mary Jo Mueller Yes
Kathy Eng Yes
Maureen Kraft Yes No assumptions are made.

4. Implementation data

Is the implementation data correct?

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 or comments are documented below. 2

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

Details

Responder Implementation dataComments
Wilco Fiers Yes
Trevor Bostic Yes Passed example 2 also has trailing whitespace that is ignored. Unsure if this should be included in description due to passed example 1.
Levon Spradlin Yes
Mary Jo Mueller I don't know. My questions or comments are documented below. Pretty sure I saw a PR coming through to add a Passed example 1 where there's no whitespace, and renumber the rest of the passed test cases, so the implementation data will necessarily have to be updated.
Kathy Eng I don't know. My questions or comments are documented below. Passed Ex 4 explains: This button has visible text that does not need to be included in the accessible name, because the "x" text node is non-text content. Suggest using the Understanding 2.5.3 terminology: 'x' is a Symbolic text character (instead of non-text content).

Inapplicable Ex 2 explanation doesn't explain why it's inapplicable. Is this inapplicable because <input> is not a widget that supports name from content?
Maureen Kraft

5. Consistent with accessibility requirements

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

Summary

ChoiceAll responders
Results
Yes 6
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
Trevor Bostic Yes
Levon Spradlin Yes
Mary Jo Mueller Yes
Kathy Eng Yes
Maureen Kraft 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. 2
Yes, there are open issues but they don't need to be resolved for the rule to be published. 1
No, there are no open issues. 3

Details

Responder Remaining open issuesComments
Wilco Fiers No, there are no open issues.
Trevor Bostic No, there are no open issues.
Levon Spradlin No, there are no open issues.
Mary Jo Mueller Yes there are open issues that need to be resolved. I have listed them below. See issue #1458 opened by Kasper: https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1458. I'm not sure if this needs to be resolved prior to publication or not, so I leaned toward the conservative side.
Kathy Eng Yes there are open issues that need to be resolved. I have listed them below. https://github.com/act-rules/act-rules.github.io/issues/1458
Maureen Kraft Yes, there are open issues but they don't need to be resolved for the rule to be published. Inapplicable example #2 talks about a text field although it demonstrates an email input field. Although one could argue an email input field expects text, it is programmatically different.

This text field does not need to have its visible text match the accessible name. The content of a textfield shows its value instead of its label. The label is usually adjacent to the textfield instead.

<div>E-mail</div>
<input type="email" aria-label="E-mail" value="Contact" />

This should be more explicit, "This Input Type Email field...or change to using <input type="text">.

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. 2
No, I have no further questions or concerns. 3

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

Details

Responder Other questions or concernsComments
Wilco Fiers No, I have no further questions or concerns.
Trevor Bostic No, I have no further questions or concerns.
Levon Spradlin No, I have no further questions or concerns.
Mary Jo Mueller Yes, I have questions or concerns, described below. Just an editorial change for the description which uses "their" repeatedly which could be difficult to parse. Hopefully I'm not changing any meaning by suggesting the description reads as follows: This rule checks that the text of the visible label for each interactive element is fully incorporated into the text of that element's accessible name. I'm open to other's additional edits.<br>
<p>Editorial change for Background section. Remove "a" from "a widget roles".</p>
Kathy Eng Yes, I have questions or concerns, described below. Under Expectation: ... except for characters in the text nodes used to express non-text content [add: and Symbolic text characters]
Maureen Kraft

8. 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. 3
Yes, it is ready to publish with the following changes. 2
No, it is not ready to publish and the reason is documented below. 1

Details

Responder Readiness for publishingComments
Wilco Fiers Yes, it is ready to publish as-is.
Trevor Bostic Yes, it is ready to publish as-is.
Levon Spradlin Yes, it is ready to publish as-is.
Mary Jo Mueller Yes, it is ready to publish with the following changes. Consider the above changes and as a group we can determine if issue 1458 is a blocker or not.
Kathy Eng Yes, it is ready to publish with the following changes.
Maureen Kraft No, it is not ready to publish and the reason is documented below. Minor:
- Styling of Input Aspects links does not meeting minimum contrast requierements. When I hover over these links they turn light blue and are difficult to read.
- Styling of Learn more about techniques under Accessibility mapping is also failing minimum contrast. It turns light blue on hover.
- Grammatical error: "This rule applies to elements with a widget roles" Remove the article "a". This is plural or make singular.

More details on responses

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.