Essential re-entry
- Decision condition
- Re-entering the information is essential.
- Evidence needed
- Process purpose and why reuse invalidates it.
- Common error
- Implementation limitation is not essential.
- Scope
- Only that information request.
A11Y-WCAG-052
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.
Users must re-enter information already entered or provided in the same process without an allowed reason.
Available formats
The HTML procedure includes the working worksheet. JSON provides the structured source data. Editable Markdown files are delivered inside package downloads.
Purpose
Users must re-enter information already entered or provided in the same process without an allowed reason.
What this result means: This WCAG 3.3.7 Redundant Entry procedure determines whether the recorded targets meet WCAG 3.3.7 on web-desktop-cross-browser in the tested states. A broader conformance decision must also account for every applicable target in the declared scope, complete processes, accessibility-supported use and the other WCAG conformance requirements.
Users must re-enter information already entered or provided in the same process without an allowed reason. People most likely affected: people with cognitive, language, learning or memory disabilities; People who use keyboards, switches, speech input or adapted pointing devices. Repeated recall and typing increases effort and error risk. In the recorded web-desktop-cross-browser environment, apply the criterion to every relevant state and named normative exception; failures in critical tasks and complete processes carry the greatest user impact.
Check auto-population or selection, then evaluate essential, security and no-longer-valid exceptions.
Reference
Full mapping describes the intended criterion scope of this manual procedure, not proof that a sample covers every item in a product or that WCAG conformance requirements are satisfied.
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.
Understanding guidance is informative and does not add a WCAG conformance requirement.
Supporting sources are identified in the mappings and source register. They do not add conformance requirements.
Page/view, target identifier, product/content version, state, technology and sample rationale.
Use authorised identifiers and redact credentials, secrets and unnecessary personal data.
Process steps, information, original entry/provision, repeated request, selection/auto-population and exception rationale.
Reference redacted evidence; do not embed sensitive files or unnecessary personal data.
Target outcome, normative branch, exception evidence, actual result, limitation and issue reference.
Use evidence references and apply the engagement retention policy.
Context: Representative synthetic example for WCAG 3.3.7 Redundant Entry on a fictional, version-frozen product target; no client or participant execution occurred.
Inspected: The tester follows S2 (Avoid redundant entry in one process) using the target, required state, tool and repeat rule stated in this procedure.
Observed output: After the tester completes the WCAG 3.3.7 Redundant Entry scenario named Avoid redundant entry in one process, the recorded observation for the target is inconsistent with the required result: Previously entered/provided information is auto-populated or selectable unless re-entry is essential, required for security or the information is no longer valid.
Evidence:
Tester reasoning: The recorded observation does not demonstrate the expected result: Previously entered/provided information is auto-populated or selectable unless re-entry is essential, required for security or the information is no longer valid. The failed decision is limited to this synthetic target and state; unexecuted coverage is not inferred.
Decision: failed
Finding: A11Y-WCAG-052-example-finding-001 — Avoid redundant entry in one process: expected result is not demonstrated. The represented barrier may affect People with cognitive, language, learning or memory disabilities.; People who use keyboards, switches, speech input or adapted pointing devices.
Remediation: Change the represented target or process so it demonstrates this result: Previously entered/provided information is auto-populated or selectable unless re-entry is essential, required for security or the information is no longer valid. Then rerun the affected step and every dependent variation.
Reviewer feedback: The reviewer confirms applicability, environment, actual-versus-expected comparison, evidence references and bounded wording; unsupported product-wide or conformance language is removed.
Final client wording: Synthetic training finding: the sampled Avoid redundant entry in one process target does not meet the procedure expectation in the recorded state. User impact and broader scope require evidence from the buyer's real execution.
Retest: Synthetic retest example: after the represented change, repeat the failed step plus material error and recovery states. Close the finding only when new evidence demonstrates the expected result; otherwise retain the non-pass outcome.
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.
The applicable target meets the criterion-specific condition in the stated state.
The applicable target violates the condition and no supported exception applies.
No target matches applicability; this target outcome is not automatically copied to a WCAG decision.
The uncertainty is material and remains unresolved rather than being converted to passed.
Applicable coverage remains incomplete.
Test every in-scope instance when practical. For a large population, document a sample that includes each template, content or control type, meaningful state and high-risk task.
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.
No related procedure is recorded.
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.
Review decision: pending. Open issues: Competent method and standards review must confirm applicability, exceptions, decision logic, evidence and calibration material; unresolved material findings block use for an external assessment.