Re: Fw: [office-accessibility] radio button groups

[Malte Timmermann <Malte.Timmermann@Sun.COM>]

Today?

Rich's Agenda said 11/30, which I assumed to be 31 because 30 is a Sunday...

Malte.

Pete Brunet wrote, On 11/24/08 03:46 PM:
> 
> Malte, Please provide input for this so we can talk about it during
> today's ODF AccSC call.  See my questions for you below.
> 
> *Pete Brunet*
>                                                                          
> IBM Accessibility Architecture and Development
> 11501 Burnet Road, MS 9022E004, Austin, TX 78758
> Voice: (512) 286-5485, Cell: (512) 689-4155
> Ionosphere: WS4G
> 
> ----- Forwarded by Pete Brunet/Austin/IBM on 11/24/2008 08:44 AM -----
> *Pete Brunet/Austin/IBM@IBMUS*
> 
> 11/12/2008 04:08 PM
> 
> 	
> To
> 	office-accessibility@lists.oasis-open.org
> cc
> 	
> Subject
> 	[office-accessibility] radio button groups
> 
> 
> 	
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I think authors need the flexibility to use frames an labels in the
> manner that best fits from the perspective of the UI designer.  I
> thought of eight scenarios.  Three of them are problematic and should be
> addressed as indicated below:
> 
> 1) Problem:  A frame around two radio button groups.  
> Solutions:  Add labels for each group and/or use two groups
> 
> 2) Problem: A button group with no group and no label
> Solutions:  Add a label and/or a group
> 
> 3) Problem:  A label must label controls in the same radio button group.
>  Although it doesn't make sense, ODF allows this.
> 
> An example follows where the first label is labeling controls 3 and 4
> but controls 3 and 5 are in the first button group.  This is a contrived
> but apparently legal example that was submitted by Malte.
> 
> <form:form form:name="*Standard*" >
>  <form:fixed-text form:name="*LabelField1*"
> form:for="*control3,control4*" form:id="*control1*" form:label="*LABEL
> 1*" />
>  <form:fixed-text form:name="*LabelField2*"
> form:for="*control5,control6*" form:id="*control2*" form:label="*LABEL
> 2*" />
>  
> <file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/Administrator/Local%20Settings/Temp/content.xml#><form:radio
> form:name="*RadioGroup1*" form:id="*control3*" form:label="*Grp1-1*" >
> </form:radio>
>  
> <file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/Administrator/Local%20Settings/Temp/content.xml#><form:radio
> form:name="*RadioGroup**2*" form:id="*control4*" form:label="*Grp1-2*" >
> </form:radio>
>  
> <file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/Administrator/Local%20Settings/Temp/content.xml#><form:radio
> form:name="*RadioGroup**1*" form:id="*control5*" form:label="*Grp2-A*" >
> </form:radio
> <file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/Administrator/Local%20Settings/Temp/content.xml#>>
> 
>  <form:radio form:name="*RadioGroup2*" form:id="*control6*"
> form:label="*Grp2-B*" > </form:radio>
> </form:form>
> 
> Malte,
> 
> Are 1) and 2) detectable by the UA?  If so our guideline can target the
> UA developer.  Otherwise we need to cover this in a guideline aimed at
> the content author.
> 
> Can the situation in 3) be eliminated via the schema so that it would be
> illegal markup?
> 
> If it's helpful here are the other five non-problematic scenarios:
> 
> 1) group with a frame
> 2) group with a label
> 3) group with a frame and label
> 4) two groups in one frame but each group having a label
> 5) two groups with no outer frame and each group having a label  (it's
> really the same as case two)
> *
> Pete Brunet*
>                                                                        
> IBM Accessibility Architecture and Development
> 11501 Burnet Road, MS 9022E004, Austin, TX 78758
> Voice: (512) 838-4594, Cell: (512) 689-4155
> Ionosphere: WS4G