From 43c80848f3bcd36ea7c185b3242224d175debe44 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Scott O'Hara Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2025 12:19:12 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] Update 1.3.6 advisory technique bullet This PR looks to clarify the third advisory technique bullet for SC 1.3.6 Identify Purpose - in my opinion, to close #2545 The previous text for the bullet just stated: >Using aria-invalid and aria-required This PR extends this text to mention that one could use the `required` attribute _or_ those aria attributes to identify required fields and/or those with validation errors. Thus, tying why the attributes are mentioned to identifying the states of these fields. I did not add this advisory technique to 1.3.5 Input Purpose, as was mentioned in the comments for the original issue. IMO, I don't think it's necessary to mention the concept of required in that SC. But, if others in the backlog taskforce disagree, it'd be easy enough to add to this Pr... --- understanding/understanding.11tydata.js | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/understanding/understanding.11tydata.js b/understanding/understanding.11tydata.js index fb9e83a3f1..8704be12ad 100644 --- a/understanding/understanding.11tydata.js +++ b/understanding/understanding.11tydata.js @@ -342,7 +342,7 @@ export default function (data) { advisory: [ "Enabling user agents to find the version of the content that best fits their needs", 'Using semantics to identify important features (e.g., coga-simplification="simplest")', - "Using aria-invalid and aria-required", + "Using required or aria-invalid and aria-required to programmatically identify required fields and/or those with validation errors", ], },