Graham Cook wrote:
Geoff Deering wrote:
Mandatory data fields, Required data, fields that require correct data
after validation should all be grouped together with a
*fieldset>legend*. This informs all users of the requirements of that
data. Leave fields that do not meet this criteria outside this group,
either in a separate group or ungrouped.
I can't agree with this Geoff. There are many examples where some fields are
mandatory and others optional but need to be in one fieldset group. Some
examples include; first and surname mandatory, middle name optional, home
phone mandatory, fax or mobile optional, addresses where extra optional
fields are added for long or complex addresses.
Yes, I agree with you on that. Maybe there is a better way to approach
those problems. Don't have an answer to it. In general though, I'd try
and stick with what I have said before, but as you have pointed out
here, there are obvious cases that don't easily fit to be able to
present a logical flow of information.
This standard of putting an asterisks * after (or before an input field)
does not only not inform an unsighted user, it often gives the
indication after they have tabbed through the field, to late for them to
manage their input without back tracking.
The "standard" that I had used for the past several years was to place a
statement at the start of the form explaining the significance of the
asterisk. These are then included within the field labels and are read by
screen readers (use text asterisk not an image). Any errors identified upon
validation are listed at the top of the form (after the asterisk
description) and preferably include a link to go to the offending field(s).
The fields in error should also be identified both visually and textually
(ref http://telstra.com.au/standards/docs/accb_03001.doc page 27).
I think this is good implementation, but I think it makes it much less
taxing on non visual users if such form fields can be clearly grouped
together, but when this can't be done, it's fine. This also helps
visual users.
At lot of work went into the Telstra standards, it's a shame they never
utilised the knowledge within Rob Pedlow's Research team, because those
set of standards, that have been in use for almost half a decade, are
full of holes and misunderstandings.
----------
Geoff Deering
******************************************************
The discussion list for http://webstandardsgroup.org/
See http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
for some hints on posting to the list & getting help
******************************************************
