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

Re: feedback requested on WAI CG Consensus Resolutions on Text alternatives in HTML 5 document

From: Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 03:45:16 +0200
Message-ID: <4A8A07AC.9060103@malform.no>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
CC: Smylers <Smylers@stripey.com>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>, W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>
Ian Hickson On 09-08-17 18.39:

> On Mon, 17 Aug 2009, Smylers wrote:
>> Aria is specifically about accessibility for those with disibilities.  
>> A user without any disabilities using, say, Lynx or Firefox with images 
>> turned off, would not be using any technology that processes aira-* 
>> attributes.  As such she would not see an alternative to the missing 
>> image, and would not know the purpose of the link.
>>
>> We (HTML WG) need to ensure that HTML 5 continues to cater for to users 
>> with 'non-mainstream' set-ups even when ignoring all Aria-specifc 
>> features.
> 
> This is quite an important point -- ARIA is intended as an accessibility 
> API layer above the semantics of HTML. As such, we really need to consider 
> ARIA markup to be a last resort.


There are two meanings of "last resort": Last resort for the
author. And last resort in the design of HTML 5.

> I don't think, even with ARIA as an 
> integral part of the language, that it makes sense for us to be making 
> conformance predicated on including ARIA markup. That is, I don't think 
> that removing ARIA markup should ever make a page non-conforming.


I will note that the idea that @role plays a bigger role than
simply being for accessibility, is already out there. [1] The role
attribute was also not designed as a "last resort" thing, I think. 
It wasn't even designed by ARIA.

It makes perfect sense that the content of <element role="button"> 
must not conflict with the button role.

I think that @role should be considered something that increases 
the chances of failure: If you simply use a <div>, then no one can 
assume any role. If you inform that the <div> has a role, then of 
course you must select the right role or fill in with the right 
content in accordance with the role.

But if we do not want to go the way of @role, then perhpas a new 
image element just for presentational images? A void element. It 
should less hassle to change

	<IMG src="">

into
	<decor src="">

than it would be to change it into

	<IMG src="" role="presentation">

[1] http://www.alistapart.com/articles/semanticsinhtml5/
-- 
leif halvard silli
Received on Tuesday, 18 August 2009 01:46:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 10 October 2014 16:24:51 UTC