Feedback: Consider changing assertion priority in "Request information about an invalid value in a spin button" (Quantity Spin Button Example, Test 4, V25.12.16)

[mcking65]

In Test 4 of the Quantity Spin Button Example Test Plan V25.12.16, 3 of the assertions are:

Priority	Assertion Phrase
SHOULD	convey minimum value, '1'
SHOULD	convey maximum value, '8'
MUST	convey error message, 'Must be between 1 and 8'

Because the error message for a spinner containing an invalid value should include the valid range of values, isn't setting the expectation that screen readers SHOULD convey min and max values in addition to the error message asking screen readers to generate output that is redundant and thus excessively verbose?

Put another way, if a screen reader is rendering a spinner where aria-invalid is true and an error message is present, shouldn't it be optional for the screen reader to convey the min and max values?

For example, in this spinner, the error message is:

Must be between 1 and 8

This error message contains the min and max so conveying the min and max in addition to the error message would be redundant.

For test 4 where aria-invalid is true, consider lowering the priority of the min and max assertions to 3 (MAY) as follows:

Priority	Assertion Phrase
MAY	convey minimum value, '1'
MAY	convey maximum value, '8'
MUST	convey error message, 'Must be between 1 and 8'

For reference, the definitions of MUST/SHOULD/MAY values for assertion priorities are in the glossary.

Test Setup

• Test File: test-10-reqInfoAboutInvalidSpinbutton-jaws.collected.html
• AT: JAWS (Version 2025.2508.120)
• Browser: Chrome (Version 144)

[css-meeting-bot]

The ARIA-AT Community Group just discussed Assertion priority discussion for spinner test 4.

The full IRC log of that discussion

<Matt_King> TOPIC: Assertion priority discussion for spinner test 4
<Matt_King> GITHUB: https://github.com//issues/1366
<cyns> mk: Raised this issue when reviewing NVDA conflicts in quantitiy spin button plan.
<cyns> mk: you have a spin button that allows input of invalid value by typing. When you do that, an error message appears that tells you how to correct the problem. In that circumstance, there are 3 assertions...
<cyns> mk: 1 assertion is that screen reader will announce error message, 2 convey min value, 3 convey max value
<cyns> mk: in the other tests in the test plan, conveying min/max is a P2/should. But in this circumstance, we might have made a mistake when setting the priority to 1
<cyns> mk: seems problematic that screen-reader conveying both error message and min/max
<cyns> mk: normally error message that says value is invalid should tell the user how it's invalid
<cyns> mk: we should consider whether min/max should be SHOULD or MAY for screen reader
<cyns> mk: NVDA does not convey min/max consistently in any tests
<cyns> mk: JAWS does not convey min/max in that circumstance, but does in others
<cyns> mk: will get input from sr developers, but does the group have an option
<cyns> Hadi: maybe range could be in instructions instead of making min/max required. I like to hear it with the error message, but should it be required? Might get a complaint if it's in isntructions. I'm for MAY, but persnally I think it should be SHOULd
<cyns> q+
<cyns> mk: question: example spin button, there isn't a requirement in WCAG or APT that you have to describe the range, because you've specified with aria-value-min and aria-value-max. expectation that screen reader will take advantage of those. But this one also has aria-invalid=true
<cyns> mk: what does wcag say about case where aria-invalid is true and spin button doesn't have an error, would that be a WCAG failure
<cyns> Joe: yes
<cyns> 3.3.1
<cyns> Joe: "...the error is described in text"
<cyns> mk: is it good enough if the error says "the value is out of range" would you fail it?
<cyns> Joe: I would probably fail it for input eero suggestions
<cyns> that is AA SHOULD
<cyns> 3.3.1 Error Identification and 3.3.3 Error Suggestion are the relevant WCAG requirements
<loren> I have to head out a little early, please let know when the engineer bot training sessions is.
<cyns> mk: If you have a WCAG-compliant spin button. Our SR requirements always assume that the control complies with WCAG. would it be redundant to require SR to do that?
<cyns> Joe: There's no WCAG requirement that the range be provided. As Hadi said, there are usability needs
<cyns> mk: we can reduce priority of exposing min/max to 3 where there is an error message present and it's aria-invalid
<cyns> mk: because the WCAG-compliant error message would give the suggestion
<cyns> Joe: I think it should still be a SHOULD based on the being a usability need
<cyns> mk: if the spinner and its error message are WCAG compliant, then you don't need to convey the min/max because the WCAG-compliant error message would say it
<cyns> mk: We are at time. Please look at the other issues assynchronously
<cyns> Zakim, end meeting

[mcking65]

As discussed in today's call , AT interop expectations are based on making accessible content interoperable. There are two relevant WCAG requirements:

1. Success Criterion 3.3.1: Error Identification requires that an descriptive error message be present when the spinner's value is invalid.
2. Success Criterion 3.3.3: Error Suggestion requires that information that can help correct the error is provided. In the case of the spin button, this would require the error message to contain information about the range of valid values.

Thus, given an accessible spin button that contains an invalid value, it is reasonable to expect that an error message is present and that the content of the error message contains infromation equivalent to the information provided by aria-valuemin and aria-valuemax.

[mcking65]

Next step: After testing is complete and the candidate reports for the quantity spin button are published, include screen reader developers in this conversation to get alignment on whether the assertion priorities should be changed.