Re: Review of Section 7.1 by ARIA working group in PF

Hi Ed,

>OK. Given that, can you live with that paragraph it currently stands? If
>not, would it help if the example were changed from screen readers to,
>say, printers?

the paragraph is problematic full stop. It uses the example of a tabbed
interface, when it is not agreed that a tabbed interface is "merely a kind
of overflow presentation"

regards
SteveF





On 3 October 2012 01:03, Edward O'Connor <eoconnor@apple.com> wrote:

> Hi Rich,
>
> You wrote:
>
> > 1. We read this text and we don't believe this text was agreed upon by
> > anyone and we have doubts this is enforceable[…]
>
> This text predates the ISSUE-204 discussion; in fact, it's been in the
> spec since March 2010:
>
>                         http://html5.org/r/4846
>
> > From an accessibility perspective it does not really hurt us[…]
>
> OK. Given that, can you live with that paragraph it currently stands? If
> not, would it help if the example were changed from screen readers to,
> say, printers?
>
> > 2. […] I don't have an issue with it[…]
>
> OK.
>
> > 4. This text refers to content being active but what is not clear is
> > whether "active" hidden text would appear in the tab order. We don't
> > believe that is the case but it needs to be stated somewhere.
>
> OK. Do you have suggested text to make that clear?
>
> > For example, what happens when you have <div tabindex="0" hidden>.
> > Does the div appear in the tab order?
>
> Did you try that in browsers? What happened?
>
>
> Thanks,
> Ted
>
>


-- 
with regards

Steve Faulkner
Technical Director - TPG

www.paciellogroup.com | www.HTML5accessibility.com |
www.twitter.com/stevefaulkner
HTML5: Techniques for providing useful text alternatives -
dev.w3.org/html5/alt-techniques/
Web Accessibility Toolbar - www.paciellogroup.com/resources/wat-ie-about.html