RE: [WSG] handling accessible form
On the other hand, relying on the form data to indicate which fields to validate may be dangerous - a malicious user may rename the field before submission, potentially bypassing your security. Regards, Mike *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] handling accessible form
On 4/23/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On the other hand, relying on the form data to indicate which fields to validate may be dangerous - a malicious user may rename the field before submission, potentially bypassing your security. Well obviously you'd validate again on the server, right? -- Australian Web Designer - http://www.blakehaswell.com/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] handling accessible form
On 22 Apr 2007, at 01:07:15, Shaun wrote: My colleague came up with the idea of naming form elements in a certain way so we could determine what server side validation to use e.g. input name='firstname:test:required' etc.. would be a required text input of name firstname. However I think this would not make for a good label for attribute (for accessibility) 1. I assume I am right that for attributes on labels get read by screen readers and messing these up would be wrong The for attribute has the value of the id attribute of the associated control, not the name attribute. Despite Internet Explorer's inexplicable belief to the contrary, id and name are not the same thing. Regards, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] handling accessible form
Nick Fitzsimons wrote: Despite Internet Explorer's inexplicable belief to the contrary, id and name are not the same thing. Care to elaborate on what the issues in IE are? P -- Patrick H. Lauke __ re·dux (adj.): brought back; returned. used postpositively [latin : re-, re- + dux, leader; see duke.] www.splintered.co.uk | www.photographia.co.uk http://redux.deviantart.com __ Co-lead, Web Standards Project (WaSP) Accessibility Task Force http://webstandards.org/ __ Take it to the streets ... join the WaSP Street Team http://streetteam.webstandards.org/ __ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] handling accessible form
On 22 Apr 2007, at 16:28:16, Patrick H. Lauke wrote: Nick Fitzsimons wrote: Despite Internet Explorer's inexplicable belief to the contrary, id and name are not the same thing. Care to elaborate on what the issues in IE are? Using getElementById(someValue) on IE will return an element that has a name attribute equal to someValue. If, for example, you have: input name=fred p id=fredBlah/p then document.getElementById(fred) will return the input, not the paragraph. Regards, Nick. -- Nick Fitzsimons http://www.nickfitz.co.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
Re: [WSG] handling accessible form
Patrick H. Lauke wrote: Despite Internet Explorer's inexplicable belief to the contrary, id and name are not the same thing. Care to elaborate on what the issues in IE are? It thinks id and name are the same thing. http://dorward.me.uk/tmp/id-vs-name.html -- David Dorward http://dorward.me.uk/ *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
RE: [WSG] handling accessible form
Your assumption is wrong. Screen readers read the text enclosed by the label element, not their 'for' attribute. I am not aware of any circumstances under which any screen reader reads the 'for' attribute for a label element, so it should be safe to use your colleague's solution. Steve Green Director Test Partners Ltd / First Accessibility www.testpartners.co.uk www.accessibility.co.uk -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Shaun Sent: 22 April 2007 01:07 To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org Subject: [WSG] handling accessible form I am helping to put together a generic form builder and handler for a bespoke CMS We decided that we would do unobtrusive JavaScript to do client side validation based on class values but also wanted to do server side. My colleague came up with the idea of naming form elements in a certain way so we could determine what server side validation to use e.g. input name='firstname:test:required' etc.. would be a required text input of name firstname. However I think this would not make for a good label for attribute (for accessibility) Two questions : 1. I assume I am right that for attributes on labels get read by screen readers and messing these up would be wrong 2. Any suggestions for a ways of getting, without using AJAX (so it work without javascript) class name into server side or solving this conundrum Thanks Shaun Hare. *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***
