Opened 4 years ago
Last modified 5 days ago
#32339 closed Bug
Accessibility issues with Django forms as_table, as_ul, as_p rendering helpers — at Initial Version
Reported by: | Thibaud Colas | Owned by: | nobody |
---|---|---|---|
Component: | Forms | Version: | dev |
Severity: | Normal | Keywords: | accessibility, forms, wcag |
Cc: | Triage Stage: | Accepted | |
Has patch: | yes | Needs documentation: | no |
Needs tests: | no | Patch needs improvement: | no |
Easy pickings: | no | UI/UX: | yes |
Description
The Django forms API has three methods available to render whole forms at once: as_table
, as_ul
, as_p
. All of these three have issues of varying severity. Although it’s not always the case that developers rely on those methods when implementing forms, I think it’s important for Django to not provide APIs that make it easy for developers to do the wrong thing – just like with security, Django should have safe defaults.
Like #32338 – those issues are with the vanilla rendering of forms, and also with related documentation code snippets. If you want to troubleshoot this, here is the form I used for testing:
- Live form as_p: http://django-admin-tests.herokuapp.com/forms/example_form/p/
- Live form as_ul: http://django-admin-tests.herokuapp.com/forms/example_form/ul/
- Live form as_table: http://django-admin-tests.herokuapp.com/forms/example_form/table/
- Form fields definitions: https://github.com/thibaudcolas/django_admin_tests/blob/main/django_admin_tests/forms.py
- Template: https://github.com/thibaudcolas/django_admin_tests/blob/main/django_admin_tests/templates/django_admin_tests/example_form.html
as_table
as_table
is the most problematic of all form output styles. Although technically tables for layout can be ok (see WebAIM’s Creating Accessible Tables), I think the general consensus is that they should be a thing of the past. Depending on how screen readers interpret the markup, there is a very real chance that they will incorrectly announce the table with tabular navigation, made for tabular data. This will make the form at best very verbose to navigate, at worst plain confusing.
There are well-established workarounds to this keep on using tables like this (like adding role="presentation" to the <table>
), but there really is no reason to use tables for layout these days, as identical or better layouts can be done with CSS (for example for a responsive form). I think this can also potentially be a source of confusion for developers – so Django shouldn’t encourage potentially-misused markup.
as_ul
as_ul
essentially has the same problem as as_table
but to a lesser extent. Wrapping whole forms in list items makes the form more verbose to navigate, and can be a bit confusing, but that’s about it. Semantically it’s also incorrect (unordered lists means the order of items doesn’t matter). I don’t think it’s very problematic, but it’s also not very useful to start with.
as_p
The as_p
markup doesn’t cause any accessibility issues that I’m aware of, but it can be problematic nonetheless because p
only allows phrasing content (see for example #31189).
From a pure "end-user outcome" perspective there is no problem with this to my knowledge, but again I think Django should err on the side of safe defaults and not encourage patterns that can lead to invalid HTML, when developers use custom widgets that would contain tags invalid in phrasing content (for example a date picker). Even if browsers handle the invalid HTML just fine, it’s very common for accessibility testing tools to implement HTML validation rules, and Django should strive to minimize false positives with those tools if there are obvious alternatives.
Proposed solution
I would recommend removing all three output styles. Even if their output can be tweaked to circumvent those issues, they make it too easy to do the wrong thing. They also discourage developers from using <fieldset>
and <legend>
to appropriately group related fields. Although this isn’t needed all the time, for larger forms it’s important for there to be clear sections.
If Django wants to provide a shortcut to render whole forms, I think it should be based on <div>
(optionally with a class name), so it still allows for layout niceties but works as expect for all users otherwise. I think the documentation should also be updated to cover why it’s also desirable to render fields individually so they can be grouped in sections.
---
I realize this would be a breaking change, with a lengthy deprecation period. During this deprecation period, it would also be great to:
- Document the gotchas with the three shortcuts.
- Recommend marking up
<table>
and<ul>
with role="presentation", so screen readers ignore the semantics.