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

Re: <header> / <footer> & ARIA

From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2009 15:30:45 +0300
Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, W3C WAI-XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>
Message-Id: <BC7591F5-0D74-489B-B5CF-08CCFC98EDA9@iki.fi>
To: Lachlan Hunt <lachlan.hunt@lachy.id.au>
On Aug 28, 2009, at 15:00, Lachlan Hunt wrote:

> Henri Sivonen wrote:
>> On Aug 28, 2009, at 13:32, Steven Faulkner wrote:
>>> the example for footer in the html 5 spec does not fit the  
>>> definition of contentinfo in the ARIA spec.
>> It seems silly to have almost one-to-one mapping between the new  
>> HTML5 sectioning elements and ARIA landmarks but not quite one-to- 
>> one. Surely the reasonable thing to do here is to adjust either  
>> HTML 5 or ARIA or both so that the following mapping holds:
>> role=main == <main>
>
> I'm not so keen on using the name <main>, and would prefer we used  
> <content>.

<main> is less ambiguous than <content>. Also, see
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Aug/1360.html

> <main> seems like it could only be used once per document, but if we  
> introduce an element for this purpose, it should be able to be used  
> within multiple sections of a page, just like header and footer can  
> be.

Doesn't that defeat the point of the element? (Of course, error  
recovery needs to be specced for the multi-<main> case. What does JAWS  
do with multiple role=main?)

>> role=contentinfo == <footer>
>> role=banner == <header>
>
> Do you think it would be acceptable to make these mappings subject  
> to where those elements are used, like I suggested earlier?

No, I think the interface between the browser and AT should be exactly  
the same for role=contentinfo and <footer>, etc. That is, it should be  
possible to add <footer> support to browsers without needing changes  
to AT. I think the AT shouldn't be able to tell if the original markup  
was <div role=contentinfo> or <footer>.

>> role=complementary == <aside>
>
> The spec currently sets the note role as the default, but allows  
> complementary or search to be used.  Should the default be changed?

That doesn't make sense to me. role=search should be applicable only  
to <form> as I understand it.

-- 
Henri Sivonen
hsivonen@iki.fi
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Friday, 28 August 2009 12:31:31 UTC

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