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!
tee
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
