Need clarification on Success Criterion 2.5.3: Label in Name

[AccessibilityEnthusiastic]

Hi WCAG Community,

I have a question related to '2.5.3: Label in Name'. In the example(Please look into the screenshot)
The accessible name is given as: Mute All
Visible label is: Mute All People can unmute themselves

Here the 'People can unmute themselves' text is not a part of an accessible name.

I think it's fine since 'Mute All' text is more relevant here and by saying this text, speech input user can activate the control.

So my question is:

1. Can we consider it as a pass
   or
2. It is still a failure of the Label in name checkpoint since 'People can unmute themselves' is not a part of accessible name(aria-label)

As per WCAG:
In order for the label text and accessible name to be matched, it is first necessary to determine which text on the screen should be considered a label for any given control. There are often multiple text strings in a user interface that may be relevant to a control. However, there are reasons why it is best to conservatively interpret the label as being only the text in close proximity.
https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG22/Understanding/label-in-name.html

[JAWS-test]

Pass becauce name is "Mute all", description is "People can..."

See also #2276

[patrickhlauke]

Agree, the apparent label here is just "Mute all" (reasonably, a voice user would likely not try to activate that button by reading out all the lengthy text there either).

I would be concerned though that the additional description there is not exposed in any other way to screen reader users, as it's overridden by the short aria-label? that'd be something to consider under 1.3.1 Info and Relationships or similar...

[JAWS-test]

Please use aria-describedby to refer from the button to the description "People can..."

[AccessibilityEnthusiastic]

Thank you!! I am closing the issue.

[bruce-usab]

@AccessibilityEnthusiastic please "Mark as answer" as you deem appropriate in the this discussion thread.

[patrickhlauke]

(retrospectively turned this into a discussion, rather than an issue, as it's asking a question/clarification of how to apply an SC, rather than an issue with the SC itself)

[bruce-usab]

Nice. I will see I can do that the next time I am first to reply to an Issue that seems like it asking a question or for clarification.