Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

2C "where the user can adjust the embedded control's value" is misleading #106

Open
JAWS-test opened this issue Feb 6, 2021 · 3 comments
Assignees
Milestone

Comments

@JAWS-test
Copy link

For read-only or disabled controls, the user cannot change the value and yet the value should be used instead of the label. Therefore the insertion "where the user can adjust the embedded control's value" should be removed

@jnurthen jnurthen added this to the 1.2 milestone Feb 11, 2021
@MelSumner MelSumner changed the title 2E "where the user can adjust the embedded control's value" is misleading 2C "where the user can adjust the embedded control's value" is misleading Apr 30, 2021
@MelSumner
Copy link
Contributor

Updated the title to reflect the reordering in #122

@MelSumner
Copy link
Contributor

For the agenda (cc @jnurthen )

  • confirm and clarify: "yet the value should be used instead of the label"

@MelSumner MelSumner self-assigned this Jun 3, 2021
@jnurthen
Copy link
Member

From 2021/06/03 meeting
msumner: wanted to get clarification, should the value be used instead of label

msumner: should we remove ability to adjust embedded control value or add a note to except readonly

jamesn: unless this list is not exhaustive, why do we need a change

jcraig: there are examples where there is a list of radios where an option needs a secondary input, e.g. a quantity

jamesn: feels that use is covered

jamesn: votes we drop it, joanie agrees

jcraig: I agree

joanie: instead of dropping should we come up with a phrase that means has value

msumner: will open a PR

@jnurthen jnurthen removed the Agenda label Jun 16, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants