Update 1.3.6 advisory technique bullet #4663
Open
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This PR looks to clarify the third advisory technique bullet for SC 1.3.6 Identify Purpose - in my opinion, to close #2545 The previous text for the bullet just stated: >Using aria-invalid and aria-required This PR extends this text to mention that one could use the `required` attribute _or_ those aria attributes to identify required fields and/or those with validation errors. Thus, tying why the attributes are mentioned to identifying the states of these fields. I did not add this advisory technique to 1.3.5 Input Purpose, as was mentioned in the comments for the original issue. IMO, I don't think it's necessary to mention the concept of required in that SC. But, if others in the backlog taskforce disagree, it'd be easy enough to add to this Pr...
✅ Deploy Preview for wcag2 ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This PR looks to clarify the third advisory technique bullet for SC 1.3.6 Identify Purpose - aiming to close #2545
The previous text for the bullet just stated:
This PR extends this text to mention that one could use the
requiredattribute or those aria attributes to identify required fields and/or those with validation errors. Thus, tying why the attributes are mentioned to identifying the states of these fields.I did not add this advisory technique to 1.3.5 Input Purpose, as was mentioned in the comments for the original issue. IMO, I don't think it's necessary to mention the concept of required in that SC. But, if others in the backlog taskforce disagree, it'd be easy enough to add to this Pr...