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

Re: HTML5 design philosophy disconnect

From: Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2012 11:06:05 +0000
Message-ID: <CA+ri+VmvZH16ZiKw57ti7peXFkOn2_Gdmt5J27raqf+rdyUwKA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
Cc: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
Hi Ben,

>Well, quite. The API mappings should have their own test suites and
>implementation notes. Is anyone working on submitting tests for the
>API mappings?

we haven't got that far yet, we have just started regular meetings,
feel free to join in.

It will make sense, where applicable  to use the ARIA test suite being
developed for ARIA 1.0.

> What's the long term plan here? Will you keep changing this as
> implementations change once W3C finally snapshots HTML5? How will
> developers get advice that reflects recent implementation changes once
> that spec is finalised?

I plan to maintain it to ensure the that it reflects the
implementation reality at thetime.

regards
Stevef


On 6 January 2012 14:32, Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
<bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Steve Faulkner <faulkner.steve@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>- the implementation status note for WebKit explains that WebKit trunk
>>>does not pass all the relevant test cases.
>>
>> this is of little use to a developer as there is no indication of what
>> it does pass and what it does not and what the relevant test cases
>> are, and in fact all the browsers have the same note.
>
> I absolutely agree that linking through to precise test results would
> be an improvement, but will probably take some time to set up. At the
> moment, I believe we're a bit short of tests… so we're perhaps putting
> the cart before the horse! Still, see the various archives for some
> discussions about how the specs could rise to something more like
> caniuse.com's levels of usability here.
>
>> I would be surprised if the accessibility API mappings are considered
>> relevant test cases for HTML5 as these are for the most part not
>> specified in HTML5.
>
> Well, quite. The API mappings should have their own test suites and
> implementation notes. Is anyone working on submitting tests for the
> API mappings?
>
>> The approach I have taken in the alt spec is to provide information to
>> developers about the advantages and disadvantages of various features,
>> for example:
>> http://dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques/#altmethod
>
> What's the long term plan here? Will you keep changing this as
> implementations change once W3C finally snapshots HTML5? How will
> developers get advice that reflects recent implementation changes once
> that spec is finalised?
>
> Perhaps it would be valuable to have an authoring guide that takes
> into account both HTML and related specs (UAAG, API mapping, CSS, DOM,
> etc) and implementation status, but that's not the HTML specification
> itself.
>
> http://www.w3.org/wiki/Web_Standards_Curriculum is a tutorial along these lines.
>
> It would be good if there was also a feature reference comparable to
> Sitepoint/Google Doctype etc.
>
> --
> Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
Received on Sunday, 8 January 2012 13:50:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:42:52 GMT