Generated file currentAuthoring: Content completeWhat file status means
This status reports only whether the generated procedure matches the current controlled source hash. It is not independent content verification, regulatory approval, product evidence or a conformance decision.
Recorded standards review: No optional specialist review recorded. Next review: Not scheduled.
Complete a form, trigger validation errors, recover and confirm success using real NVDA with Firefox.
Available formats
Use this test in the format you need
The HTML procedure includes the working worksheet. JSON provides the structured source data. Editable Markdown files are delivered inside package downloads.
Complete a form, trigger validation errors, recover and confirm success using real NVDA with Firefox.
What this result means: This procedure records how Complete and correct a form with NVDA with Firefox behaves on windows-nvda-firefox. It can expose evidence relevant to WCAG 1.3.1, 3.3.1, 3.3.2, 3.3.3 and 4.1.2 for the tested task and environment. Use the linked conformance procedures for WCAG 1.3.1, 3.3.1, 3.3.2, 3.3.3 and 4.1.2 to assess the complete requirements across the declared conformance scope.
Why it matters
Detect form journeys whose labels, instructions, errors, focus or status changes are missing, misleading or unusable when using NVDA with Firefox. People most likely affected: blind and low-vision people using the named screen reader and browser combination. Users may enter incorrect data, be unable to find or correct errors, lose context or fail to confirm submission. In the recorded windows-nvda-firefox environment, check browse and focus modes, structural navigation, live changes and recovery; misleading speech or cursor position can hide context even when controls remain visually available.
When to use it
Apply when the product includes a form that must be evaluated for practical interoperability with NVDA with Firefox. This is a journey, not a substitute for criterion-specific WCAG testing.
Confirm before starting
Is a form journey selected and safe test data authorised?
Is real NVDA with Firefox available in the exact recorded environment?
Are all important success, validation, interruption, recovery and confirmation states available?
Mark it not applicable only when
The selected subject contains no form journey requiring this platform-interoperability evaluation.
Exceptions
This platform journey has no normative exception of its own. Any exception affecting a linked WCAG criterion must be evaluated in the separate criterion-specific procedure.
Reference
Supporting information
Standards and requirement mappings
W3C-WCAG22 · 1.3.1secondary · partial
This Desktop screen-reader journey observes Complete and correct a form with NVDA with Firefox in the recorded windows-nvda-firefox environment. Use the linked WCAG 1.3.1 conformance procedure to evaluate all normative parts of WCAG 1.3.1 across the declared scope.
W3C-WCAG22 · 3.3.1secondary · partial
This Desktop screen-reader journey observes Complete and correct a form with NVDA with Firefox in the recorded windows-nvda-firefox environment. Use the linked WCAG 3.3.1 conformance procedure to evaluate all normative parts of WCAG 3.3.1 across the declared scope.
W3C-WCAG22 · 3.3.2secondary · partial
This Desktop screen-reader journey observes Complete and correct a form with NVDA with Firefox in the recorded windows-nvda-firefox environment. Use the linked WCAG 3.3.2 conformance procedure to evaluate all normative parts of WCAG 3.3.2 across the declared scope.
W3C-WCAG22 · 3.3.3secondary · partial
This Desktop screen-reader journey observes Complete and correct a form with NVDA with Firefox in the recorded windows-nvda-firefox environment. Use the linked WCAG 3.3.3 conformance procedure to evaluate all normative parts of WCAG 3.3.3 across the declared scope.
W3C-WCAG22 · 4.1.2secondary · partial
This Desktop screen-reader journey observes Complete and correct a form with NVDA with Firefox in the recorded windows-nvda-firefox environment. Use the linked WCAG 4.1.2 conformance procedure to evaluate all normative parts of WCAG 4.1.2 across the declared scope.
W3C-ARIA-APG · W3C-ARIA-APGplatform · supporting
This source does not override WCAG or create an additional WCAG conformance requirement.
This source does not override WCAG or create an additional WCAG conformance requirement.
Supporting and advisory guidance
Supporting sources are identified in the mappings and source register. They do not add conformance requirements.
Evidence specification
Environment record
Exact OS, browser, assistive-technology, physical device where applicable, settings and clean-state declaration.
Use a redacted extract or evidence reference. Do not include credentials, secrets or unnecessary personal data.
Calibration record
Fixture/version, actions, expected output and actual output.
Use a redacted extract or evidence reference. Do not include credentials, secrets or unnecessary personal data.
Assistive technology output
Speech Viewer extract or exact transcript, keystroke, system focus, Browse/Focus Mode and form state. for initial, error, recovery and confirmation states.
Use a redacted extract or evidence reference. Do not include credentials, secrets or unnecessary personal data.
Use a redacted extract or evidence reference. Do not include credentials, secrets or unnecessary personal data.
Responsibility record
Product, browser, OS, assistive-technology and configuration checks plus unresolved questions.
Use a redacted extract or evidence reference. Do not include credentials, secrets or unnecessary personal data.
Worked example and outcome calibration
A11Y-NVDA-003-WORKED-001: representative worked example
Context: Representative synthetic example of the Civic Benefits Portal contact-details form; not a real NVDA run.
Inspected: Blank-form discovery, email entry, empty telephone validation, malformed email validation, recovery and confirmation in the declared reference environment.
Observed output: The representative transcript records 'invalid entry' for email but provides no associated correction text; focus remains on Submit. The telephone error is announced with its field name.
Evidence:
EVD-REF-007 representative speech transcript
EVD-REF-008 focus sequence
EVD-REF-009 DOM relationship extract
Tester reasoning: One validation class is usable, but the malformed-email error cannot be located or corrected nonvisually. The environment execution remains blocked until a real NVDA/Firefox run occurs.
Decision: blocked
Finding: FND-REF-002 — Email format error lacks an exposed correction message. A screen-reader user may know submission failed but not how to correct the email address.
Remediation: Associate concise format guidance with the email input, expose the error through its accessible description and move focus to or announce the error summary according to the form design.
Reviewer feedback: Reviewer changed the outcome from failed real-platform execution to blocked because the transcript is representative; the finding is retained as calibration content, not client evidence.
Final client wording: Representative calibration example: the email-format error is not programmatically associated with the email field. Confirm the behaviour with the approved real NVDA and Firefox environment before issuing this wording as a client finding.
Retest: RT-REF-003 remains blocked pending a real NVDA/Firefox environment; the synthetic fixed-state relationship inspection passes as supporting evidence only.
Boundary: This is a representative, synthetic worked example for training and calibration. It is not evidence from a client product, participant or real assistive-technology execution.
Outcome calibration
Passed
The tester discovers instructions, completes the form, finds and corrects each error, recovers after interruption and confirms submission without visual assistance.
The complete journey is usable in the exact recorded NVDA with Firefox environment.
Failed
After invalid submission, focus moves but the screen reader announces neither an error nor the affected field, and the tester cannot locate the problem.
A validation barrier prevents independent recovery in the selected journey.
Not applicable
The selected product area contains no form journey.
No journey target matches applicability.
Cannot tell
The same field works in calibration but fails only in the product; browser and assistive-technology evidence conflict and responsibility remains unresolved.
Record the behaviour and use cantTell rather than unsupported attribution.
Not tested
The success path was completed, but validation-error and recovery states were not executed.
Required journey states remain untested.
Sampling, complete processes and platform limitations
Run each selected critical journey from start to finish, including its main error and recovery paths. Record which journeys and states were included.
If this check is part of a user journey, test the selected journey from start to finish, including relevant errors and recovery. Record any path that was not tested.
Only a real execution in the exact recorded screen-reader/browser combination provides coverage. Simulation and accessibility-tree inspection do not.
Check relevant browser, tool or assistive-technology release notes before assigning unexpected behaviour to the product.
If responsibility is unclear, record the reproducible behaviour and use cannot tell until it is resolved.
Related procedures
A11Y-WCAG-007
A11Y-WCAG-048
A11Y-WCAG-049
A11Y-WCAG-050
A11Y-WCAG-054
ACT rules and WCAG technique traceability
This is a project-authored manual procedure, not a W3C Approved ACT Rule. An ACT result can support only the part of this procedure covered by that rule. It does not replace the remaining manual or assistive-technology checks.
No supporting W3C Approved ACT Rule is selected for this procedure.
Understanding SC 1.3.1. Techniques are examples, not extra requirements. Record any technique or common failure used, but decide the result against the success criterion.
Understanding SC 3.3.1. Techniques are examples, not extra requirements. Record any technique or common failure used, but decide the result against the success criterion.
Understanding SC 3.3.2. Techniques are examples, not extra requirements. Record any technique or common failure used, but decide the result against the success criterion.
Understanding SC 3.3.3. Techniques are examples, not extra requirements. Record any technique or common failure used, but decide the result against the success criterion.
Understanding SC 4.1.2. Techniques are examples, not extra requirements. Record any technique or common failure used, but decide the result against the success criterion.
Review history and source register
2026.08.27-rc.9 — Reworked for plain language, case-focused steps, scoped evidence and transparent draft review status.
2026.08.27-rc.9 — Migrated to professional catalogue schema v3 with separated outcomes, structured authority, applicability, evidence, decision and review records.
2026.08.27-rc.9 — Specialist procedure mapped to its task family and current first-party platform guidance and checked for internal consistency; competent review and real execution remain separate.
2026.08.27-rc.9 — Replaced migrated boilerplate with a case-specific reference implementation and completed generated-file integrity review.
2026.08.27-rc.9 — Rewritten as an atomic professional-delivery flagship with component effort guidance and a complete representative worked example.
2026.08.27-rc.9 — Procedure guidance and presentation simplified without changing draft governance status.
Review decision: pending. Open issues: No real NVDA with Firefox execution has been performed or claimed. A registered real-platform adapter must execute the calibration and journey, followed by a distinct competent review, before platform coverage can be recorded.; The linked WCAG criteria remain secondary partial mappings and require separate atomic or criterion-level assessment.