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

Re: Drop longdesc, get aria-describedat?

From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2012 16:48:14 +1100
Message-ID: <CAHp8n2ntis92o2exAnRg2dvouq-f4U3q+dh5-ACTgsYisaGDpQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org>
Cc: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>, Richard Schwerdtfeger <schwer@us.ibm.com>, W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>, HTML Accessibility Task Force <public-html-a11y@w3.org>
On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 3:46 PM, Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org> wrote:
> Hi Silvia,
> At 03:03 PM 3/8/2012 +1100, Silvia Pfeiffer wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 11:42 AM, Judy Brewer <jbrewer@w3.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > I suggest you come to an HTML A11Y meeting for discussion; the next one
>> > is
>> > scheduled for March 15th, due to other accessibility meetings and
>> > conferences this week; or better yet to the text alternatives sub-team
>> > meeting (next one should be March 13th and I am happy to put this on the
>> > agenda) where we had been exploring this specific category of issues in
>> > more
>> > depth. Also, please note that there has been heavy discussion around
>> > many
>> > approaches on this already, and the multiple delays by the HTML WG on
>> > processing the longdesc change proposal may at this point themselves be
>> > contributing to the confusion regarding alternative solutions on this
>> > question. The TF-supported change proposal on longdesc is still overdue
>> > for
>> > a fair hearing; getting another change proposal considered ahead of that
>> > would be bad process.
>> Independent of what happens with @longdesc, it seems obvious to me
>> that describedAt needs to be developed as an ARIA attribute and thus
>> the a11y TF doesn't seem to be the right place to develop it. Would
>> you agree?
> The W3C Working Group that is chartered to work on WAI-ARIA, and that has
> been doing so, as well as collecting input for the next version, is the
> Protocols and Formats Working Group (PFWG), which would be the group
> appropriately handling aria-describedat.
> Information about PFWG is here:
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/
> Information about ARIA document development is available here:
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/#aria
> The HTML Accessibility (A11y) Task Force is a Joint Task Force of the HTML
> WG and the PFWG; it does not develop the ARIA spec. The ARIA Task Force,
> also under PFWG, does so. Information about both these and other PFWG Task
> Forces (some of which also have sub-teams, as indicated, such as the Media
> Sub-Group to which you have contributed greatly) is available here:
> http://www.w3.org/WAI/PF/#taskforces
> Some people have been discussing and/or responding to comments and questions
> about ARIA on the HTML A11y TF list, but I don't think anyone proposed
> developing aria-describedby directly in the HTML A11y TF rather than in the
> group that is chartered to work on it.

Sounds like we agree.

>> > As for a community group approach, note that that does nothing to
>> > actually
>> > standardize anything, only to explore an issue. Creating a community
>> > group
>> > for aria-describedat outside of the people who've been working most
>> > directly
>> > on developing ARIA, and already thinking about aria-describedat in some
>> > depth, could slow rather than speed things up, or at best not materially
>> > change the timeline.
>> Fair enough. So maybe it's time to develop a spec for
>> @aria-describedAt and submit it to PF/WAI for consideration?
> I don't see what advantage would be gained by developing a separate spec for
> aria-describedat when that is already intended as part of the ARIA 1.1 work
> planned by the ARIA TF under PFWG.

Can you point me to a document that states when the ARIA 1.1 work will
get started and what it will entail and a time plan for it? I wasn't
able to find anything.

> Please let me know if these clarifications help.

They do, thanks.

Received on Thursday, 8 March 2012 05:49:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:05:27 UTC