13568 2011-08-03 03:41:19 +0000 use of "accessible" to refer to placement of UI controls is confusing 2011-12-23 20:34:50 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified HTML WG LC1 HTML5 spec unspecified PC Windows NT VERIFIED FIXED http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/common-input-element-attributes.html#attr-input-autocomplete a11y, a11ytf P2 normal --- 1 cyns ian annevk ian joshue.oconnor laura.lee.carlson mike public-html-a11y public-html-admin public-html-wg-issue-tracking xn--mlform-iua public-html-bugzilla oldest_to_newest 52079 0 cyns 2011-08-03 03:41:19 +0000 "A user agent may allow the user to override the resulting autocompletion state and set it to always on, always allowing values to be remembered and prefilled), or always off, never remembering values. However, the ability to override the resulting autocompletion state to on should not be trivially accessible, as there are significant security implications for the user if all values are always remembered, regardless of the site's preferences." Please use a term other than "trivially accessible" and reserve the term "accessible" for accessibility by users with disabilities. 53989 1 mike 2011-08-04 05:35:08 +0000 mass-move component to LC1 55210 2 annevk 2011-08-16 08:52:13 +0000 Suggestions? 55234 3 joshue.oconnor 2011-08-16 14:31:21 +0000 (In reply to comment #2) > Suggestions? "autocomplete state to on should not be easily accessed.l, as there are..." should do it. 56142 4 ian 2011-09-01 00:03:33 +0000 I do not accept the premise that the word "accessible" is reserved for discussing usability by those with disabilities, but I'm fine with changing the wording to be better. However, changing it from "accessible" to "accessed" is both grammatically incorrect and, more importantly, pointless, since those two words both have the same root and thus any confusion that would apply to one would apply equally to the other. Any other suggestions? 56149 5 xn--mlform-iua 2011-09-01 01:47:27 +0000 (In reply to comment #0) > However, the ability to > override the resulting autocompletion state to on should not be trivially > accessible, as there are significant security implications for the user if all > values are always remembered, regardless of the site's preferences." Proposal - moving words around etc: """ However, the design of the user agent ought to prevent the user from trivially setting the autocompletion state to always on as there are significant security implications for the user if - regardless of sites' preferences and regardless of the user's awareness of it, all values are always remembered, . """ 56157 6 joshue.oconnor 2011-09-01 08:02:30 +0000 (In reply to comment #4) > I do not accept the premise that the word "accessible" is reserved for > discussing usability by those with disabilities, but I'm fine with changing the > wording to be better. You have a point. The context however needs to be more clearly described in order to remove the connotation that the usage of the word 'accessible' relates to people with disabilities. If you were to use the form "[...]accessible by [insert User Agent name/ whatever]" then I think the usage is absolutely fine as the context is clearer. I think its the phrase 'trivially accessible' that is creating the issue here. 57437 7 ian 2011-09-27 19:36:00 +0000 I don't understand the proposal in comment 6. I used something like comment 5. EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html Status: Accepted Change Description: see diff given below Rationale: Changing the wording here is not a problem. 57438 8 contributor 2011-09-27 19:38:04 +0000 Checked in as WHATWG revision r6594. Check-in comment: tweak the wording http://html5.org/tools/web-apps-tracker?from=6593&to=6594