W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-a11y@w3.org > August 2012

Re: why are we pursuing this idea? (was: Implementation Details request on Issue 204 Decision)

From: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2012 17:11:33 +0100
Message-ID: <CAEhSh3eL2GfyGUqXaGV-4LPu84J=tWnee5D_ibbG=-fu3qO1_w@mail.gmail.com>
To: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Cc: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>, John Foliot <john@foliot.ca>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, public-html@w3.org, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
On Tue, Aug 21, 2012 at 4:59 PM, Leif Halvard Silli
<xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no> wrote:
> Comment: It seems safe to assume that that authors will become
> surprised:
>
> 1. Some will be surprised that <p hidden id=description> gets
>    presented to users despite the hidden attribute.
> 2. Others will be surprised (if they learn it at all) that
>    VoiceOver currently flattens *any* aria-describedby
>    referred content.

Agreed.

Doubtless some will also be surprised if @hidden content _is not_
presented. I have a suspicion this may be the smaller group. If we had
stuck with the original name of @irrelevant, this would have less
surprising.

> I must honestly say, however, that it, on the surface, seems illogical
> to assume that there ought - or can - be a difference with regard to
> "flattening" depending on whether the content is hidden or visible.

Agreed.

> Thus, I don't believe that authors will find it very surprising that
> hidden content can be rendered as "rich" content to AT users. On the
> contrary, I think that authors would expect to be able to use ARIA to
> draw those kind of links.

Agreed.

I've seen well-meaning authors ask about exposing DOM subtrees to
screenreader users only, however misguided this might be from a
universal accessibility perspective and however poorly fitted ARIA is
to this task.

--
Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
Received on Tuesday, 21 August 2012 16:12:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 21 August 2012 16:12:31 GMT