I have this question about "strong element being more semantical and accessible for required field" in the web form and like to hear your opinion.

I came to the conclusion after conducting my little user testing - it first started with an intention of spam and error monitoring over the form script I use, I then learned that despite the indication that "asterisk" is marked as required field", many people who took time to submit the forms on clients' sites still missed the "*". Because I use no JS validation for the form, I decided to bold the required field using strong element for two new sites. It seems working as the bold texts caught people attention and I received no errors email notification on missing to enter requried fields. The result also gave me a though on how screen readers treat the strong element and that it's indeed more accessible and semantically correct.

Working on a site, and thanks to Matt Fellows and his futher assistance, I implemented his JS form validation script to the web form. Using "asterik " to indicate the required field no longer is an issue with JS validation, however I decided to stick with the strong element. Much work had put into it to modify the code and css, but client came back to me to want the '*' over the <strong> because it's a conventional practice.

Really want to stick with the strong element for the reason above, however I am also doubting my conclusion that it's more accessible for screen readers as I never tested on one. Before I try to convince client the strong element is better approach, I would love to hear your opinion.

Thank you!


List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm

Reply via email to