W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > October 2009

[Bug 7711] The "strong native semantics" are worded very similarly -- but not quite the same -- for input type=Number, input type=range, and progressbar.

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Sun, 18 Oct 2009 10:09:39 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1MzShn-0007Ry-1s@wiggum.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7711


Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|REOPENED                    |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |WONTFIX




--- Comment #6 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>  2009-10-18 10:09:38 ---
> I think ARIA integration has been tricky enough that it may be worth erring on
> the side of being too explicit.

I disagree. I think the danger of being too explicit is that implementors would
be swiming in trivial requirements and would miss the important ones.


> In the specific case of aria-valuenow, range and spinbutton make it a required
> attribute

I assume you mean slider and spinbutton.

When the spec sets an implied role=slider, it always also implies
aria-valuenow.
For the case of role=spinbutton, there's one case where it can't set
aria-valuenow, namely when the value is not known. (Setting it to "" is just as
non-conforming as omitting it, except the ARIA spec says it SHOULD NOT be
specified if the value is not known, which implies a preference to omitting
it.)


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Sunday, 18 October 2009 10:09:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 18 October 2009 10:09:40 GMT