W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > October 2012

[Bug 19451] New: Guidance on when to add ARIA inline vs script is misleading

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2012 21:19:22 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-19451-2486@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=19451

          Priority: P2
            Bug ID: 19451
                CC: mike@w3.org, public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
          Assignee: faulkner.steve@gmail.com
           Summary: Guidance on when to add ARIA inline vs script is
                    misleading
        QA Contact: dave.null@w3.org
          Severity: normal
    Classification: Unclassified
                OS: All
          Reporter: lazdnet@gmail.com
          Hardware: PC
            Status: NEW
           Version: unspecified
         Component: Using ARIA in HTML
           Product: HTML WG

The sentence in question:

"If the content and interaction is only supported in a scripting enabled
browsing context, for example Google docs applications require JavaScript
enabled to work, so it is safe for them to include the ARIA markup inline.

Otherwise add ARIA via scripting."

It seems like the author meant to say:

"If the content and interaction is only supported in a scripting enabled
browsing context, for example Google docs applications require JavaScript
enabled to work, it is safe to add the ARIA via scripting."

Either way, some additional elaboration on when to use markup inline and when
to add via scripting would be beneficial.

Thanks!

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Wednesday, 10 October 2012 21:19:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 10 October 2012 21:19:25 GMT