Hi, The guidelines state:
"Guideline 12.3: Divide large blocks of information into more manageable groups where natural and appropriate. [Priority 2] Content developers should group information where natural and appropriate. When form controls can be grouped into logical units, use the FIELDSET element and label those units with the LEGEND element. " In other words, where you have a form with a LARGE number of form controls, group them, where natural and appropriate, in logical units. How assistive technologies (such as screen readers) then choose to use that information is up to them - they can ignore it completely if they so wish. They are the ones best placed to judge the usefulness to their users of any particular feature and best placed to get feedback from their users. Paraphrasing, the guidelines for content developers are saying "do this and your pages will be more accessible". The guidelines for developers of assistive technologies are saying "these features are available to you, if your users would find them helpful" It is not the part of content developers to second-guess which accessibility features will be useful for a user of an assistive technology, but to provide a basis upon which assistive technologies may be developed and improved. Stuart On Thu, November 27, 2008 11:29 pm, tee wrote: > Hi Steven, thanks for the two links. > > I am replying in a new thread because, after reading the "Too much > accessibility - FIELDSET LEGENDS", I feel that it deserves to open a > new thread for a new, hopefully more thorough discussion on Fieldset > and Legend, and maybe to have a closer exmination that these two > attributes are like the tabindex, accesskeys and titles, more harmful > than useful. > > The article was over 2 years old, while I am in full agreement with > these: > > The right way is to choose LEGEND text that is: > > Concise: between 1 and 6 words. > Relevant: to every single form field in the FIELDSET. > Seamless: in that the words chosen for the LEGEND should make sense > when joined to each label phrase. This might take a bit more > explanation, so read on and youll see why. > > W3C said: "The LEGEND element allows authors to assign a caption to a > FIELDSET" > > No way in my right mind that I would ever think the legend will be > read out by each set of label atrribute repetitive. > > Quote BIM: I dont see that the W3c intention and the JAWS screen > reader implementation are necessarily at odds; JAWS has a duty to > keep users informed that they are in the same group, and this is one > way of achieving it. > > Has a "duty" as being overly helpful that turns to absurdity and > annoyance? > > Does BIM a memebr here too? I am sorry, but I think his logic and > reason are at fault. > > An annoyance is an annoyance whether the legend is one word or 10 > words long. One word of legend text, if repeated 10 times to me over > and over on every page I visit. It's an annoyance. > > This leads me to take a closer look on how I use the fieldset and > legend; at a closer examination, I think I am going to remove fieldset > and legend in that 'get shipping estimation' form and I will stop > using fieldset and legend in forms that contain only a few inputs/ > checkboxes/radio button. > > > tee > > > > > > ******************************************************************* > 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] *******************************************************************
