OOTB Core Form Fields Not WCAG 2.1 AA Compliant

[#1]

Request for Feature Enhancement (RFE) Summary:	Our accessibility audit shows WCAG 2.1 AA violations when using placeholders alongside ARIA labelling on Core Form Fields
Use-case:	Using Adobe Core Form Fields, with ootb configuration "Display help message as placeholder”  Example:  on page https://www.sunstargum.com/gb-en/about-us/contact-us.html
Current/Experienced Behavior:	1. **Accessible name vs description conflict** - Inputs with `placeholder` + `aria-describedby` or visible `<label>` lead to inconsistent accessible name computation. Placeholder either doesn’t get announced (e.g., JAWS, NVDA), or is dropped in favor of description text, making it unreliable :contentReference[oaicite:1]{index=1}. - Relying on placeholder as label fails WCAG 2.1 AA: contrast (1.4.3), persistent visible labels (2.4.6, 3.3.2), Name, Role, Value (4.1.2) :contentReference[oaicite:2]{index=2}. 2. **Placeholder distractions** - Placeholder text disappears once typing starts—users lose helpful context :contentReference[oaicite:3]{index=3}. - Placeholder is low‑contrast by default, often failing 4.5:1 contrast ratios :contentReference[oaicite:4]{index=4}. 3. **ARIA mismatch with core component settings** - Enabling “Display help message as placeholder” fails to update `aria-describedby` reference, pointing at nonexistent elements and breaking description linkage :contentReference[oaicite:5]{index=5}.
Improved/Expected Behavior:	Required compliance behaviour: • Inputs need clear programmatically associated `<label>` and persistently visible title. • Use `aria-describedby` for help text only—description must remain tied to a valid element. • Placeholders can provide examples, *never* replace labels, and should not disrupt ARIA structure.
Environment Details (AEM version/service pack, any other specifics if applicable):	AEM Release 2025.9.22450.20250911T131210Z
Customer-name/Organization name:	Sunstar Suisse  SA
Screenshot (if applicable):
Code package (if applicable):

[#2]

@Juliayaz1 Thanks for proposing this idea. This has been reported to the engineering under the internal reference FORMS-22018. The product team will triage this request to verify feasibility based on the prioritization model. This post will be updated according to Jira's status.