Suggested amendments to WCAG Understanding for SC 3.3.2 to differentiate between SC 2.4.6

[KMSOC]

Based on what I believe WCAG's intention is, there is contradictory content in Understanding for 3.3.2 in order to explicitly differentiate it from 2.4.6. To differentiate 3.3.2 from 2.4.6, it is recommended that 3.3.2 be scoped to solely focus on the existence of a label or instruction; leave the sufficiency of that label to 2.4.6 per the very last line in 3.3.2's Understanding.

Suggested amendments to SC 3.3.2 to avoid contradictions and overlap with 2.4.6 using suggested deletions:

Understanding

The intent of this Success Criterion is to have content authors present instructions or labels that identify the for controls in a form so that users know what input data is expected. In the case of radio buttons, checkboxes, comboboxes, or similar controls that provide users with options, each option must have a appropriate label so that users know what they are actually selecting. Instructions or labels may also specify data formats for data entry fields, especially if they are out of the customary formats or if there are specific rules for correct input. Content authors may also choose to make such instructions available to users only when the individual control has focus especially when instructions are long and verbose.

The intent of this Success Criterion is not to clutter the page with unnecessary information but to provide important cues and instructions that will benefit people with disabilities. Too much information or instruction can be just as harmful as too little. The goal is to make certain that enough information is provided for the user to accomplish the task without undue confusion or navigation.

This Success Criterion does not require that labels or instructions be descriptive, correctly marked up, identified, or associated with their respective controls - this aspect is covered separately by 1.3.1: Info and Relationships. It is possible for content to pass this Success Criterion (providing relevant labels and instructions) while failing Success Criterion 1.3.1 (if the labels or instructions aren't correctly marked up, identified, or associated).

Further, this Success Criterion does not take into consideration whether or not alternative methods of providing an accessible name or description for form controls and inputs has been used - this aspect is covered separately by 4.1.2: Name, Role and Value. It is possible for controls and inputs to have an appropriate accessible name or description (e.g. using aria-label="...") and therefore pass Success Criterion 4.1.2, but to still fail this Success Criterion (if the labels or instructions aren't presented to all users, not just those using assistive technologies).

This Success Criterion does not apply to links or other controls (such as an expand/collapse widget, or similar interactive components) that are not associated with data entry.

While this Success Criterion requires that controls and inputs have labels or instructions, whether or not labels (if used) are sufficiently clear or descriptive is covered separately by 2.4.6: Headings and Labels.

Benefits

Providing labels and instructions (including examples of expected data formats) helps all users - but particularly those with cognitive, language, and learning disabilities - to enter information correctly.
Providing labels and instructions (including identification of required fields) can prevent users from making incomplete or incorrect form submissions, which prevents users from having to navigate once more through a page/form in order to fix submission errors.

Examples

A field which requires the user to enter the two character abbreviation for a US state has a link next to it which will popup an alphabetized list of state names and the correct abbreviation.
A field for entering a date contains initial text which indicates the correct format for the "Date".
To enter their name, users are provided with two separate text fields. Rather than having a single label "Name" (which would appear to leave the second text field unlabelled), each field is given an explicit label - "Given Name" and "Family Name".
A U.S. phone number separates the area code, exchange, and number into three fields. Parentheses surround the area code field, and a dash separates the exchange and number fields. While the punctuation provides visual clues to those familiar with the U.S. telephone number format, the punctuation is not sufficient to label the fields. The single "Phone number" label also cannot label all three fields. To address this, the three fields are grouped in a fieldset with the legend "Phone number". Visual labels for the fields (beyond the punctuation) cannot be provided in the design, so invisible labels are provided with the "title" attribute to each of the three fields. The value of this attribute for the three fields are, respectively, "Area Code", "Exchange", and "Number".

[JAWS-test]

See #3984